UMASS/AMHERST 


aiEDbbDDSEELETb 


^L 


E,  COCHIN,  AND  "BRAHMA:' 

By  GEO.  P.  BURNHAM, 

iJJTBY/  EJffGLAITD.  I'DULTEY  BSBEDSS,"  '<  A  HUMOROUS  &9C0BB  OF  TIB  WES 
yjBVisS/''  ;iU'JIi!f HAM'S  HEW  POU&TBT  BOOK*'  RXC» 


mil  y  #rtg  gUtrgtrdtai  of  ife*  £fw»*. 

*  ■■—■  ■ * 

MELROSE,  MASS. 
I87i, 


mmmm 


(MM 


MASSACHUSETTS 
STATE      COLLEGE 


LIBRARY 


SF 

487 

3958 


This    book    may    be    kept    out 

TWO  WEEKS 

only,    and    is    subject    to    a    Fine    of    TWO 
CENTS  a   day  thereafter.      It   will  be  due   on 
the   day    indicated    below. 


OCT  111956 


6,34-5    £>93 

octr 


p 


bo 


* 


§.  m.  (&.  sum,  n 


Painted  by  F.  Winterhalter. 
t 


IN  THE  ROBES  OF  THE  MOST  NOBLE  ORDER  OF  THE  GARTER. 

ENGRAVED  BY  BBICHEB  &  CONANT,  BOSTON. 

^{jotograpfjrt  from  tfje  portrait  tit  possession  of  Cro.  $.  Burnfjam; 

PRESENTED  TO  HIM  BY  HER  MAJESTY,  THE  QUEEN.  IN  18.13. 


THE 


CHINA     FOWL. 


SHASGHAE,  COCHIN, 


AND 


U 


BRAHMA. 


59 


By  GEO.  P.  BUKN'HAM, 


ATJTHOB    OF 

"  NEW-ENGLAND  POULTRY  BREEDER,"  A  HUMOROUS  "HISTORY  OF  THE  HEN  FEVER," 

"BURNHAH'S  NEW  POULTRY  BOOK,"  ETC. 


U§   JoJftg   Choice   Illustrations. 


MELROSE,  MASS. 
18T4. 


* 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1874,  by 

GEO.  P.   BUENHAM, 
In  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  CoDgress,  at  Washington. 


Press  of  Rand,  Avery,  &  Co.,  Boston. 


P  E  E  F  A  C  E. 


This-  volume  is  written  with  two  specific  purposes  in  view:  first,  to  give  a  brief  and  suc- 
cinct account,  as  far  as  the.  record  permits,  of  the  introduction  into  America  of  the  Chinese 
varieties  of  domestic  fowls,  subsequently  to  the  appearance  of  this  notable  race  of  poultry  in 
England  (in  1843-44)  ;  and  secondly,  to  correct  the  numerous  errors  and  false  theories  that 
have  obtained,  both  in  this  country  and  in  Great  Britain,  touching  the  origin  and  establish- 
ment of  the  most  noted  of  modern  gallinaceous  breeds,  first  known  on  both  sides  of  the  At- 
lantic, as  the  reliable  records  show,  to  wit,  the  "  Gray  Shanghaes  ; "  or,  as  they  are  latterly 
denominated  by  common  consent,  the  Light  and  Dark  "  Brahma"  fowls. 

That  these  latter-mentioned  birds  descend  direct  from  the  Chinese,  and  not  from  any  India 
race,  is  perfectly  clear;  since,  as  W.  B.  Tegetmeier,  F.Z.S.,  correctly  stated  in  1853,  "there 
is  not  a  particle  of  evidence  to  show  that  (what  is  now  called)  the  Brahma  fowls  ever  came 
from  India."  And  Mr.  Tegetmeier  truthfully  added  also  at  that  early  day,  that  "  they 
originated  not  in  India,  but  in  America." 

Lewis  Wright  of  London,  however,  who  has  contributed  no  inconsiderable  amount  of  inter- 
esting matter  to  the  poultry  literature  of  modern  times,  most  singularly  and  ignorantly  per- 
sists, in  his  later  volumes,  upon  the  idea  that  the  Brahmas  are  of  East  India  origin  ;  and  that 
the  account  given  by  Mr.  Virgil  Cornish,  of  an  early  pair  of  large  gray  fowls  having  been 
"imported  into  New  York  from  Luckipoor,  up  the  Brahmapootra  River,"  furnishes  the  correct 
theory  as  to  the  origin  of  this  variety. 

This  silly  sailor-Cornish-Chamberlin  story  (which  for  a  time  was  believed  in  by  some  per- 
sons), upon  which  Lewis  Wright  of  England  bases  his  utterly  groundless  notions,  was  many 
years  ago  absolutely  exploded.  Mr.  Cornish  first  wrote  (March  2,  1852,)  that  he  procured  his 
stock  of  Mr.  Chamberlin  of  Connecticut,  who  was  said  through  "a  sailor"  to  have  chanced 
upon  "  a  pair  of  large,  light-gray  fowls,  which  said  Chamberlin  first  brought  into  the  State  of 


8  PREFACE. 

Connecticut,  from  somewhere,  in  the  early  part  of  the  year  1849."  Upwards  of  sixteen  years 
after  this  original  account  of  Cornish  had  been  published,  this  same  authority,  over  his  own 
signature,  in  a  second  letter,  to  a  Mr.  Wed,  just  as  clearly  states  that  this  very  Chamberlin 
"  pair  of  gray  fowls  arrived  at  New  York  on  board  a  ship  from  Luckipoor  in  India,  in  Sep- 
tember, 1846;"  of  which  two  statements,  Mr.  Plaisted,  in  1874,  declares  "there  is  nothing 
accurate  in  the  first,  and  the  last  one  is  still  worse  !  " 

/  And  this  is  all  the  evidence  the  world  has  ever  had  about  tb.3  introduction  of  this  remark- 
able pair  of  Chamberlin  gray  birds,  "imported  from  India/'  via  New  York,  into  Connecticut, 
an  event  which,  beyond  cavil  or  dispute,  never  thus  occurred  at  all ;  since  the  fact  is  now 
established,  beyond  question  or  refutation,  that  neither  in  the  year  1849  or  1846  (according  to 
Cornish,  Wright,  et  als.,  or  in  18^7,  as  a  later  writer  has  it)  did  there  arrive  at  New  York 
any  ship  or  other  vessel  "from  the  port  of  Luckipoor  in  India;"  as  will  be  clearly  demon- 
strated in  the  succeeding  pages  of  this  work 

At  the  same  time,  I  shall  endeavor  to  plainly  show,  herein,  from  the  long-since-printed 
testimony  and  records,  that  the  large  light  "Gray  Shanghaes"  bred  by  the  undersigned  for 
many  years  after  1849,  were  from  China  stock;  and  that  from  these  (imported  by  me  in  1849- 
'50  from  Shanghae)  came  the  originals  of  the  now  famous  so-called  "  Brahmas." 

I  am  indebted  to  Messrs.  Lee  &  Shepard,  publishers  of  Boston  ;  to  Jos.  M  Wade,  Esq.,  of 
"Fanciers'  Journal,"  Philadelphia,  Penn. ;  to  H.  H.  Stoddard,  Esq.,  of  "Poultry  World," 
Hartford,  Conn.;  T.  S.  Cooper,  Esq.,  of  Coopersburg,  Penn.;  Philander  Williams,  Esq.,  of 
Taunton,  Mass. ;  Dr.  Kenegy  of  "  Polo  Argus,"  111. ;  T.  T.  Bacheller,  Esq.,  of  "  N.  W.  Poultry 
Journal,"  Minneapolis  ;  W.  H.  Todd,  Esq., Vermillion,  0. ;  and  other  gentlemen  —  for  some  of 
the  fine  illustrations  in  this  work.  And  to  these  and  various  publicly  unnamed  friends,  I  hereby 
tender  my  acknowledgments  for  hints  and  suggestions  that  are  embodied  in  my  present  book, 
which  is  now  presented  to  the  fanciers  of  America  as  a  truthful  and  explicit  account  of  what 
the  author  knows  regarding  the  origin,  history,  characteristics,  and  breeding  qualities  of  the 
China  Fowl,  —  Shanghae,  Cochin, and  Brahma,  —  from  1844  to  1874  inclusive;  accompanied 
with  corroborative  authority  for  the  statements  I  now  make,  gathered  from  the  most  reliable 
data  I  have  been  able  to  reach  or  make  myself  acquainted  with,  during  the  thirty  years  I 
have  enjoyed  so  large  a  practical  experience  with  all  the  varieties  of  this  now  universally 
favorite  race  of  Chinese  fowls. 

GEO.  P.  BURNHAM. 

Melrose,  Mass.,  September,  1874. 


CONTENTS. 

♦ — 

PART    I. 

PAGE. 

THE  CHINA  FOWL     .       11 

PART  II. 
THE  SHANGHAES 23 

PART  III. 
THE  COCHINS 46 

PART  IY. 
THE  "BRAHMAS" 63 

PART    V. 
SELECTION    AND    MATING 115 

PART    VI. 
BURNHAM    vs.   WRIGHT 137 


THE   CHINA  FOWL: 


SHAISTGHAE,   COCHIN,   "BKAHMA." 


Under  this  general  appellation,  I  include  all  the  various-colored  domestic 
fowls  now  popularly  known  in  England  and  America  as  "  Shanghaes" 
"  Cochins"  or  " Brahmas ; "  to  wit,  the  white,  gray,  lemon,  buff,  cinnamon, 
brown,  partridge,  grouse,  and  black,  —  feathered-legged  or  smooth-shanked. 
And  in  this  volume  I  shall  show  that  all  these  varieties,  under  whatever 
name  during  the  last  thirty  years  they  may  have  been  denominated,  or  at 
the  present  time  are  called,  have  one  common  origin;  that  no  "importation"  of 
any  one  of  said  varieties  or  strains  have  reached  this  country  or  Great  Britain 
from  any  place  save  Chinese  ports ;  and  especially  that  none  of  these  fine 
fowls  have  been  brought,  or  can  be  authoritatively  shown  ever  to  have  come, 
into  the  two  countries  mentioned,  either  from  the  province  of  Cochin  China, 
originally,  or  more  especially  from  India,  in  a  single  instance. 

This  averment  at  the  outset,  I  make  understandingly.  Premising  that  I 
shall  not  unduly  urge  upon  the  attention  of  the  readers  of  this  work  any 


12  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

theory  or  standpoint  of  my  own,  particularly,  I  will  add  that  I  intend,  nev- 
ertheless, to  support  this  position  by  the  production  of  ample  corroborative 
recorded  facts  regarding  the  history  and  origin  of  these  several  different  vari- 
eties, giving  dates,  the  names  of  the  early  known  owners  and  importers  of 
each  kind,  as  I  find  such  records  publicly  made,  —  and  the  authorities  I 
adduce  herein  can  be  consulted,  as  I  have  consulted  them,  upon  reference 
to  the  sources  quoted,  from  which  I  have  gathered  the  information  in  this 
book,  — set  down  with  the  view  to  make  it  so  clear  and  plain  that  "  he  who 
runs  may  read "  and  comprehend  my  present  history  of  this  much-abused 
as  well  as  greatly-lauded  race  of  poultry. 

The  Malay  fowl,  the  Java,  the  Calcutta,  and  the  Chittagong — all  intro- 
duced into  America  or  England,  first  or  last,  in  the  past  forty  or  fifty  years  — 
have  long  been  known  to  old  writers,  and  the  earlier  breeders  ;  ship-masters 
having  not  infrequently  brought  home  in  their  vessels  specimens  of  these 
birds,  upon  their  return  voyages  from  the  "  East  Indies."  And  these 
"Asiatic"  samples  have  been  confounded,  in  the  memories  of  some  of  these 
"old  salts,"  with  the  Chinese  birds  more  recently  imported,  of  which  latter 
only  I  propose  to  write  in  these  pages.  From  the  similarity  in  size,  form, 
and  certain  general  characteristics  common  to  all  these  Eastern  varieties,  this 
error  on  the  part  of  mariners  is  not  to  be  wondered  at.  But  I  do  not 
intend  to  enlarge  upon  the  merits  or  demerits  of  the  India,  Kulm,  Java,  Cey- 
lon, Malay,  Calcutta,  or  Chittagong  varieties ;  and  I  set  down  this  paragraph 
just  here,  simply  to  advise  the  reader,  in  advance,  that  my  present  volume 
will  be  devoted  strictly  to  the  consideration  of  the  race  comprised  in  the 
leading  title  of  this  work  ;  namely,  The  China  Fowl. 

This  bird  has  been  found  to  be  single-combed  and  pea-combed  ;  it  is 
smooth-limbed,  and  feathered  upon  the  legs ;  it  is  short-legged  and  long- 
shanked  ;  it  is  bred  of  all  colors,  from  pure  white  to  dead  black ;  it  is  found, 
at  times,  long-bodied,  stout  and  rangy  in  form,  —  or  oftenest,  compactly 
built,  broad-backed,  full-breasted,  and  shapely ;  its  proportions  are  massive 
and  commanding,  and  the  better  strains  are  comely,  though  inclining  to  a 
heavy  or  clumsy  exterior :  yet  in  all,  and  over  all,  it  has  come  to  be  esteemed 
a  general  favorite  everywhere,  in  some  one  or  more  of  its  different  colors  and 
shapes.  And  it  is  safe  to  assert  that  no  domestic  fowl  the  world  has  ever 
yet  produced  can  excel  this  race  in  the  admiration  of  a  majority  of  the 
breeders  and  fanciers  of  the  present  day. 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA. 


13 


Upon  page  10,  for  example,  will  be  found  an  excellent  illustration  of  a 
pair  of  thorough-bred  China  fowls,  a  cock  and  hen  of  the  now  so-called  "  Par- 
tridge Cochins."     This  pair  of  fowls  are  true  representatives  of  the  Chinese 


YOUNG  COCK  AND  PULLET;  EARLY  CHINA  FOWLS. 


race  generally ;  and  the  artistic  drawing  mentioned  is  one  of  the  most  accu- 
rate I  have  ever  met  with.  Without  entering  at  present  upon  the  qualities 
of  this  particular  pair  of  birds  (which  are  life-like  representations  of  two 


14  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

specimens  imported  by  T.  S.  Cooper,  Esq.,  of  Coopersburg,  Perm.,  from  Eng- 
land, lately),  we  will  only  say  here  that  we  point  to  that  portraiture  as  a 
very  perfect  delineation  of  the  naturally-fovmed  better  than  ordinary  type  of 
pure  Chinese  poultry,  whose  characteristics,  in  their  original  condition,  we 
will  now  describe  in  detail,  as  our  long  experience  with  this  race  has  taught 
us  to  see  the  genuine  Shanghae  stock  in  America. 

We  write  the  term  Shanghae  here  advisedly,  for  the  simple  reason  that 
almost  all  the  known  importations  of  these  notable  fowls  came  into  the 
United  States  originally  from  the  port  of  Shanghae,  China,  and  for  years 
were  thus  denominated.  One  or  two  importations  have  also  been  made, 
within  the  last  three  decades,  by  ships  arriving  from  Canton  or  Hong 
Kong,  which  will  be  duly  referred  to  hereafter. 

These  two  last-mentioned  places  are  Chinese  ports  also,  situate  on  the 
easterly  coast  of  the  Chinese  Empire,  about  six  hundred  miles  south  of 
the  city  of  Shanghae,  which  lies  in  latitude  31°  north,  upon  the  Yellow  Sea. 
Upon  the  opposite  page  we  present  a  map  of  the  localities  we  shall  have 
occasion  to  refer  to  in  this  volume.  This  drawing  is  an  accurate  tracing  of 
the  outline  boundaries  of  the  countries  mentioned,  taken  from  Johnson's  and 
Ward's  "  New  Illustrated  Atlas,"  revised  and  published  in  1865. 

By  consulting  this  map,  the  reader  will  observe  that  the  empire  of  China 
is  far  distant  from  the  territory  of  India,  even  in  "  a  bee-line ; "  while  to 
double  the  low-running  peninsula  of  Malay,  sailing  vessels  from  the  coast  of 
China  to  Calcutta  have  an  immense  distance  to  pass  over,  —  say  from  Shang- 
hae to  the  mouth  of  the  Ganges,  —  not  less,  at  the  shortest,  than  rising  four 
thousand  miles. 

The  cities  of  Shanghae,  north,  on  the  coast ;  Nanking,  up  the  Kiang  River  ; 
King  Po,  on  the  coast ;  Hong  Kong,  south ;  and  Canton,  up  the  Si  River 
(near  the  last  place),  are  all  Chinese  ports,  accessible  to  American  and  Brit- 
ish commerce.  But  the  leading  ports  whence  sail  our  ships  trading  with  the 
extreme  East  are  Shanghae,  Hong  Kong,  and  Canton,  —  since  the  close  of 
the  Chinese  war  with  Great  Britain,  in  1843 ;  the  first  of  these  three  (Shang- 
hae) being  the  principal  point  of  destination  and  departure  of  vessels  be- 
longing to  "  foreign "  countries,  trading  with  the  Celestials  upon  their  sea- 
coast  territory. 


OUTLINE    MAP    OF    CHINA,   COCHIN    CHINA,    EAST    INDIA,   etc. 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,   BRAHMA.  17 

It  may  be  deemed  an  easy  matter  to  " import"  direct  from  China  a  few 
native  domestic  fowls,  that  are  worth  taking  off  the  deck  of  a  returning 
Indiaman  into  an  American  port,  after  its  six  or  eight  months'  voyage  from 
Chinese  seas.  But  those  who  have  tried  to  compass  this  seemingly  trivial 
manoeuvre,  in  past  years,  have  found  it  a  very  difficult  feat  to  accomplish 
satisfactorily,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  of  this  undertaking  goes. 

I  have  individually  attempted  this  seven  or  eight  times,  and  never  suc- 
ceeded but  once  in  the  endeavor  to  get  from  China  direct,  to  my  own  order, 
a  dozen  Shanghae  fowls ;  and  of  these,  when  the  consignment  reached 
Central  Wharf,  Boston  (to  purchase  which  I  had  placed  in  the  ship's  first 
officer's  hands  one  hundred  Spanish-milled  dollars,  when  he  sailed  from 
Boston),  there  were  but  just  three  fowls,  a  cock  and  two  hens,  that  I  cared  to 
take  home,  of  the  fourteen  birds  he  brought  me  from  Shanghae  ;  and  which 
he  positively  assured  me  were  all  there  were  left  alive  upon  coming  into  home 
port,  out  of  sixty-five  chickens  he  placed  on  ship-board  when  he  sailed  from 
Shanghae,  seven  months  previously.  The  others  died,  he  said,  on  the  pas- 
sage back.  Far  more  likely,  no  doubt,  was  it,  that  they  went  one  after 
another,  when  wanted,  into  the  cook's  pot  for  the  captain's  dinners,  —  espe- 
cially the  largest  and  most  desirable.     t  . 

The  difficulty  in  consummating  this  sort  of  enterprise  is  principally  two- 
fold, thus :  As  can  well  be  understood,  the  mass  of  gentlemen  or  business- 
men who  go  from  the  West  to  China  possess  neither  the  taste,  the  knowledge, 
or  the  inclination  to  concern  themselves  about  looking  up  poultry  in  that  far- 
away land.  They  do  not  go  there  for  this  purpose,  and  commonly  think 
they  have  a  far  more  "  dignified"  object  in  their  journeys  thither.  Secondly, 
the  ship-masters  and  sailors  who  go  there,  know  little  or  nothing  of  poultry 
(except  to  eat  it  when  cooked),  and  care  less  about  this  subject,  which  home- 
fanciers  are,  to  a  greater  or  less  degree,  so  interested  in.  Thus  the  latter 
class  never  trouble  themselves  to  secure  any  particular  style,  shape,  color,  or 
sized  fowl,  when  they  put  on  board  their  vessels  a  few  chickens,  to  be  used 
merely  as  food  for  the  captain's  cabin  table,  usually,  during  a  part  or  the 
whole  of  their  return  voyage. 

It  occasionally  happens  that  all  the  chickens  thus  placed  on  ship-board  in 
Shanghae,  or  other  China  ports,  are  not  devoured  or  killed \e?i  route  home- 
ward.    The  remains   of  such   shipments  reach  American  or  British  ports, 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,   BRAHMA.  19 

generally  speaking,  in  a  filthy,  half-starved,  vermin-infested,  or  roupy  'con- 
dition, —  in  consequence  of  their  long  confinement,  and  the  neglect  and  hard 
weather  they  are  subjected  to  while  cooped  up  for  months  en  voyage.  And 
these  are  nine  times  in  ten  the  fowls  "imported  from  China  direct "  that  we 
get  both  in  America  and  England,  or  read  of  in  the  poultry  and  other 
journals  of  the  day.  It  is  not  always  thus,  however,  as  I  will  show  by  and 
by.     But  this  is  the  rule.     The  others  are  the  exceptional  cases. 

Let  me  give  a  brief  illustration  upon  this  point.  A  near  relative  of  my 
own,  the  master  of  a  fine  vessel  from  a  leading  American  port,  has  been  in 
command  of  a  ship  for  the  last  twenty  years,  sailing  between  New  York  or 
New  Bedford,  and  Shanghae  or  Canton,  and  Whampoa.  At  least  seven  or 
eight  times  within  that  period,  when  he  has  sailed  from  home,  I  have 
arranged  with  him,  personally,  to  bring  me  out  from  China  a  few  good  fowls ; 
which  I  supposed  it  would  be  no  very  difficult  thing  for  him  to  accomplish. 
Two  or  three  times  he  has  brought  back  with  him  six  or  eight  or  ten  birds, 
such  as  he  could  readily  obtain  while  lying  in  port  at  Shanghae  or  Canton. 
But  these  proved  most  indifferent  samples,  compared  with  what  I  bred  my- 
self by  hundreds  in  my  own  yards,  and  were  of  all  colors  and  grades  except 
the  kinds  I  desired  to  obtain.  Yet  he  thought  them  fine,  and  through  per- 
sonal friendship,  in  each  instance,  he  did  his  level  best  to  please  me.  I 
wouldn't  give  them  yard-room,  —  the  best  of  them  !  Yet  these  were  really 
"imported  Shanghaes,"  direct  from  Chinese  territory. 

Thus,  I  repeat  it,  it  is  not  so  simple  a  performance  as  most  of  us  imagine 
it  is,  to  get  out  from  Celestial  ports  direct  a  consignment  of  good  specimens 
of  genuine  Chinese  domestic  poultry.  The  merchants,  travellers,  and  busi- 
ness men  who  go  hence  to  that  far-off  country,  care  nothing  about  this 
"  hobby  "  of  their  friends ;  while  the  mariners  and  ship-masters,  whose  lives 
are  passed  upon  the  seas  only,  know  little  or  nothing  of  the  "fine  points" 
of  these  birds.  So  we  have  always  been,  and  must  continue  to  be,  depend- 
ent upon  the  chances  that  occur  now  and  then,  to  replenish  our  Chinese 
stock  ;  and  the  opportunities  to  do  this,  satisfactorily  to  experienced  breeders, 
are  certainly  but  rare,  at  the  best. 

These  chance  opportunities  occasionally  occur,  however.  In  my  own  ex- 
perience two  or  three  times,  and  in  instances  of  the  experience  of  others 
whom   I  will  presently  refer  to,  a  few  small  clutches  of  excellent  fowls,  of 


20  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

the  genuine  type  and  true  stamp,  as  events  have  proven,  have  been  obtained 
from  China,  or  brought  thence  into  America  and  England,  of  the  buff,  drab, 
brown,  light  gray,  and  yelloiv  ;  from  which  have  been  produced  most  of  the 
finest  Shanghaes  (now  called  u  Cochins "  or  "  Brahmas  ")  that  have  ever 
been  seen  or  known  in  the  world. 

In  the  years  of  grace  1843-44,  I  had  in  my  possession  a  goodly  quantity 
of  domestic  fowls,  five  or  six  hundred  in  number  (which  I  had  bred  and 
gathered  together  during  those  years),  upon  leased  premises,  some  few  acres 
in  area,  located  at  the  foot  of  Mt.  Pleasant  in  Roxbury,  Mass.,  known  as 
"  Williams'  Garden,"  —  a  fine  large  estate,  then  belonging  to  the  late  Aaron 
D.  Williams,  now  entirely  covered  over  with  handsome  dwelling-houses. 

I  had  bred  fowls  some  years  prior  to  this  time,  on  a  limited  scale,  but  at 
this  period  was  engaged  in  the  then  hopeful  attempt  to  breed  poultry  to 
profit,  within  limited  space,  in  large  numbers,  successfully, — an  experi- 
ment which,  I  need  hardly  announce  at  this  day,  proved  futile  and  ineffectual. 

In  1846-'47  I  removed  to  more  retired  quarters,  and,  with  my  flocks  of 
poultry  reduced  to  less  than  a  hundred  good  birds,  on  an  estate  upon 
which  I  erected  a  cottage  house,  I  went  on  more  successfully.  I  resided 
upon  Williams  Street,  Koxbury  (now  Shawmut  Avenue  extension),  until  late 
in  1849,  when  I  purchased  the  place  in  Melrose,  Mass.,  where  I  now  live, 
and  early  in  1850  removed  my  greatly  improved  stock  of  fowls  to  this  town  ; 
where  I  have  since  resided,  now  a  quarter  of  a  century. 

From  1848-49  down  to  the  present  year  (1874),  for  the  most  part  I  have 
constantly  had  the  Chinese  fowls  upon  my  premises,  in  large  or  lesser  quan- 
tities ;  and  my  long  experience  with  this  race  has  afforded  me  ample  oppor- 
tunity to  judge  of  their  good  quality,  and  to  make  myself  —  through  almost 
numberless  practical  experiments  with  them  —  thoroughly  acquainted  with 
their  habits,  their  characteristics,  their  points,  and  their  general  qualities. 

The  China  fowl  is  a  good  bird;  and  the  fanciers  of  this  country  and 
Great  Britain  have  shown  their  preference  largely  in  favor  of  this  breed,  in 
some  of  its  various  colors,  by  cultivating  and  improving  the  size,  and 
increasing  the  intrinsic  value  of  this  fowl,  until  the  modernized  "  Brahma " 
or  "Cochin,"  as  it  is  at  this  time  denominated,  has  come  to  be  known 
deservedly  as  the  most  desirable  of  all  the  poultry  we  have  among  us. 

Other  breeders  of  course  have   their  favorites,  and  justly  so.      But  the 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA. 


21 


majority  of  fanciers  prefer  some  of  the  varieties  of  the  Chinese  fowl.  And  the 
"  Brahmas  "  or  the  "  Cochins  "  —  all  of  which  come  from  Shanghae  originally, 
as  we  shall  see  —  now  lead  the  van  in  the  estimation  of  the  mass  of 
American  or  English  breeders. 


AN  EARLY-IMPORTED  CHINA  HEN. 


The  two  illustrations  preceding  portray  the  shape  and  general  forms  of 
an  e&rZy-imported  cock  and  hen  of  the  Chinese  race.  They  are  neither  so 
comely  or  so   attractive   in   shape   or   features   as   are   those   subsequently 


22  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

received,  or  which  were  bred  from  the  first  stock  had  in  America.  Both  of 
these  are  coarse,  ungainly,  and  dumpy.  But  we  give  these  drawings  of 
original  birds  here,  for  comparison  with  the  "  improved  "  samples  of  the  race 
to  be  found  in  these  pages  farther  on. 

From  the  evidence  at  hand,  however,  it  is  very  clear,  whatever  may  be  the 
theory  of  one  or  two  late  writers  upon  this  subject,  that  all  our  large,  fine, 
so-called  "  Asiatic  varieties "  of  domesticated  fowls  belong  to  but  one  race, 
of  whatever  color  we  breed  them ;  and  the  entire  testimony  in  modern 
works  on  poultry  goes  directly  to  this  point,  as  to  the  origin  whence  they 
come  into  our  hands,  in  every  instance.     And  that  origin  is  China. 

I  am  not  now  speaking  of  any  of  the  still  coarser  grades  of  the  Malay 
species,  the  Javas,  or  even  the  Chittagongs,  about  which  early  authors  used 
to  write  so  fluently  without  knowing  any  details  as  to  the  nativity  of  this 
style  of  bird,  except  what  they  casually  learned  from  some  stray  sailor,  who 
was  not  to  be  easily  disputed,  perhaps,  in  whatever  yarn  he  might  choose  to 
spin  regarding  the  birds  he  brought  home  accidentally  "  from  the  E-Stingies." 
But  my  present  pages  will  comprise  a  monograph  of  the  Chinese  fowl; 
whence  I  proceed  to  show  descend  all  the  pure  "  Cochins  "  and  "  Brahmas," 
of  every  shade  we  possess  to-day,  either  in  England  or  the  United  States. 

In  Great  Britain,  since  the  advent  of  the  Queen's  famous  so-called 
"Cochin  Chinas,"  and  more  especially  within  the  past  twelve  or  fifteen 
years,  perhaps,  the  old  China  fowl  has  been  manifestly  improved,  by  careful 
mating  and  judicious  breeding,  in  the  hands  of  the  experienced  fanciers  who 
have  long  maintained  their  ascendency  over  us  in  America,  in  a  general  way, 
in  their  treatment  of  poultry,  as  we  all  very  well  understand. 

The  "  importations  "  made  into  the  United  States  in  late  years  come  from 
this  source  principally;  and  very  good  fowls  they  send  us  too,  as  the 
majority  of  American  importations  of  "  Cochins,"  &c,  of  all  colors,  which 
have  been  since  1865-66  received  thence  into  the  United  States,  and  which 
are  now  arriving  here  every  month,  from  some  of  the  leading  breeders  in 
England,  amply  demonstrate ;  the  different  classes  of  which  we  now  propose 
to  describe  in  detail  in  the  future  pages  of  this  volume,  with  the  single 
additional  remark,  here,  that  the  English  style  of  breeding  the  China  fowl 
(as  evinced  in  the  latest  specimens  of  the  Light  and  Dark  lf  Brahmas"  we 
have  received  thence)  is  not  uniformly  to  American  taste. 


THE   SHANGHAES. 


The  Shanghae  fowl,  first  brought  from  the  Chinese  port  of  that  name,  and 
thus  called  by  the  early  possessors  of  those  birds  in  England  or  America, 
usually  with  us  upon  this  side  of  the  Atlantic  also,  took  the  name  of  the 
importer  or  owner  of  such  birds,  in  the  early  days ;  as,  for  example,  in  the 
instances  of  the  Bailies',  the  Forbes',  the  Marsh,  the  Cushing,  or  the  Burn- 
ham  Shanghaes;  which  exact  types  of  fowls  are,  however,  in  accordance 
with  poultry  society  "  Standard "  rules  at  the  present  time,  denominated 
"  CochinsP  Of  the  "  Cochin  Chinas  "  we  shall  speak  at  length  in  another 
chapter :  we  simply  mention  this  "  convertible  term  "  here,  in  order  that  the 
reader  of  this  volume  may  not  confound  the  two  names,  as  we  proceed. 

We  will  describe  the  old  Shanghae  fowl  first,  therefore,  because  through 
priority  in  date  we  received  in  America  —  in  Salem,  Mass.,  in  Philadelphia, 


24 


THE  CHINA  FOWL. 


Penn.,  at  New  York  City,  and  elsewhere  (so  it  has  been  frequently  stated)  — 
from  Shanghae,  China,  the  earliest  consignments  of  this  stock. 

It  has  been  said  that  as  early  as  in  1843,  such  birds  came  both  into  Salem 


\Mim 


PAIR  OF  YELLOW  SHANGHAES  —  COCK  AND  PULLET.      (1849.) 

and  Philadelphia,  though  I  deem  this  announcement  problematical.  The 
well-known  stock  of  Messrs.  Sturgeon  and  Moody  of  England  was  received 
from  China  by  those  gentlemen  in  1847,  —  so  they  inform  us  j  and  these  were 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  25 

among  the  very  first  accredited  Shanghaes  we  heard  of.  They  were  cer- 
tainly very  early  birds.  Mr.  Sturgeon  writes  to  Mr.  Tegetmeier  of  London 
that  he  got  his  fowls  in  1847,  from  a  ship  in  the  West  India  docks.  A 
clerk  of  his  chanced  to  go  on,  board,  who,  struck  by  the  appearance  of  these 
extraordinary  fowls,  bought  them,  on  his  own  responsibility,  at  what  Mr. 
Sturgeon  considered  and  denounced  as  a  most  extravagant  price,  —  six  or  eight 
shillings  (less  than  two  dollars)  each  !  A  younger  brother  of  Mr.  Sturgeon's 
unwittingly  killed  two  of  the  five  birds  on  their  arrival,  leaving  him  but  a 
cock  and  two  pullets.  He  took  little  interest  in  them  at  that  time ;  but  he 
subsequently  raised  from  these  the  finest  buff  Shanghaes  ever  produced  in 
England.  "  All  our  birds,"  he  adds,  "  came  from  Shanghae,  and  were  feath- 
ered-legged." 

It  is  stated  by  those  who  have  observed  the  fact  in  Chinese  ports,  that  the 
Shanghaes  (or  now  so-called  "Cochins")  of  all  colors,  are  seen  quite  as  fre- 
quently upon  their  native  soil,  without  any  feathering  upon  the  shank  below 
the  hocks,  as  with  this  feature.  But  the  style  in  this  country  is,  to  breed 
them  heavily  feathered  upon  the  legs.  The  early  importations  spoken  of 
were  all  feathered-legged,  some  strains  showing  this  more  markedly  than 
others,  though- my  own  imported  birds  were  thus  generously  feathered. 

The  Marsh  Shanghaes,  which  comprised  a  dozen  buff  and  partridge-colored 
specimens,  were  brought  from  the  "  Celestial  domain  "  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Marsh 
of  West  Roxbury,  Mass.,  or  they  were  sent  to  him  direct,  as,  early  as  in  1846, 
I  think,  or  in  1847.  These  were  a  noble  clutch  of  birds.  They  all  had  the 
heavy  leg-feathering,  and  were  genuine  imported  stock.  They  were  not  bred  by 
him  with  any  special  care  as  to  mating,  for  the  producing  of  particular  colors 
of  chickens,  at  that  early  time,  however ;  and  Mr.  Marsh,  at  first  having  but 
one  cock,  which  was  a  superb  light  red  and  buff,  bred  him  to  all  the  hens 
promiscuously.  The  result  was,  that,  though  all  the  true  characteristics  of 
the  China  race  were  in  a  positive  degree  reproduced  and  maintained  in  the 
progeny,  the  color  became  uncertain  and  various,  —  from  rich  golden  yellow 
to  dark  brown,  with  the  intermediate  shadings  and  markings  of  partridge  and 
grouse-colored  birds,  first  and  last.  They  were  large,  well-formed,  magnifi- 
cent specimens  of  the  China  variety,  nevertheless,  and  enjoyed  for  many 
years  a  reputation  whi^h  subsequent  importations  did  not  interfere  with,  how- 
ever fine  they  came. 

The  Forbes  Shanghaes  came  into  Boston,  direct  from  Shanghae  also,  in 


26  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

the  year  1848,  —  brought  home  by  Capt.  E.  B.  Forbes,  after  whom  this  strain 
was  named.  They  were  beautiful  birds  too,  but  of  a  peculiar  tint  in  color. 
The  hens  were  a  pale  drab,  or  silvery  cinnamon  hue,  while  the  cock  was  of 
a  light  reddish  dominique,  or  marbled  tint ;  and  for  years  after  their  arrival 
in  America  this  importation  bred,  through  generation  after  generation,  drab 
pullets  and  light  reddish  dominique  cocks,  almost  invariably.  The  Forbes 
fowls  were  frequently  called  "  Yellow  Shanghaes,"  in  those  days ;  but  the 
color  of  the  original  birds  was  precisely  what  I  have  described  it,  and  it  was 
quite  different  from  what  we  afterwards  knew  as  the  Yellow  or  Buff  Shanghaes, 
—  as  in  the  cases  of  the  Cushing  importation  at  Kingston,  Mass.,  and  those  of 
S.  A.  Drake,  known  as  the  Rev.  Mr.  Missionary  Brown's  stock.  They  bred 
the  full-feathered  leg  uniformly,  and  for  a  long  period  enjoyed  a  deservedly 
high  reputation  as  first-class  stock,  in  all  respects. 

The  Cushing  importation  also  came  into  America  from  Shanghae.  These 
were  of  a  bright  golden  color,  hens  and  cocks ;  the  latter  being  the  most  bril- 
liant, truly  "  flame-colored "  cast  of  plumage  I  ever  met  with,  in  my  experi- 
ence with  the  Shanghae  race.  They  ran  out  shortly,  however,  or  were  crossed 
with  others,  and  were  seen  but  for  a  year  or  two  in  their  purity,  when  the  old 
stock  disappeared  altogether,  as  did  the  Palmer,  and  Cope  strains. 

A  general  description  given  in  1849, 1850,  of  the  best  Shanghae  fowls,  will  be 
found  to  closely  correspond  with  the  character  of  the  birds  at  the  present  time 
universally  called  "  Cochins,"  of  which  the  drawing  (page  23)  is  an  admirable 
representation,  but  which  name,  as  in  the  instance  of  *'  Brahma,"  in  late  years 
commonly  given  to  the  Gray  Shanghaes,  is  a  misnomer,  as  I  shall  show  as  we 
proceed;  albeit  there  is  no  valid  objection  to  the  establishment  of  both  these 
later  cognomens,  nevertheless,  since  it  is  the  fashion  now-a-days ;  and  every- 
body assents  to  these  changes  from  the  original  true  title. 

Their  legs,  in  the  early  time,  "were  uniformly  stout,  usually  of  a  bright 
reddish  yellow,  sometimes  nearly  flesh-colored ;  and,  for  the  most  part,  the 
limbs  below  the  hock  were  very  heavily  feathered.  Their  general  plumage 
was  of  a  brilliant  yellow  or  gold-color,  variegated  and  *  pencilled '  with  black, 
dark  brown,  or  red.  The  tail  was  short  and  upright ;  body  squarely  formed ; 
wings  small  and  tucked  up  high ;  legs,  when  young,  rather  long  for  beauty ; 
head  full  sized ;  comb  single,  upright,  and  serrated ;  feathers  rather  fine  and 
downy  than  otherwise,  —  and,  altogether,  they  were  a  large,  fine,  showy 
fowl,  as  then  described  by  Bement,  Dixon,  Kerr,  and  Dr.  Bennett." 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA. 


27 


*-»* 


gray  shanghae  cock  ;  burnham's  stock,  1S52.    {Drawn  by  H.  Weir.) 

The  Brown,  or  Drake  fowls,  as  they  were  more  commonly  called,  came  into 
Massachusetts  from  the  city  of  Shanghae  originally,  in  the  year  1846.     The 


28  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

Rev.  Mr.  Brown  was  a  missionary  to  China,  as  was  Rev.  C.  B.  Marsh,  also, 
of  West  Roxbury,  Mass.  Mr.  Brown  resided  in  China  some  ten  years,  and 
thought  his  opportunity  to  select  good  birds  was  the  best.  He  affirmed  that 
the  natives  prized  those  he  brought  to  America  upon  his  return  home,  above 
all  other  varieties  in  that  country ;  and  they  were  very  choice  specimens  for 
those  days.  The  editor  of  "  The  Massachusetts  Ploughman  "  wrote  of  these 
Brown's  Shanghaes  in  1849,  "We  saw  some  of  these  fine  birds  sold  at  the  first 
Boston  exhibition  at  as  high  as  $13.00  the  pair ;  and  we  were  told  that  a  few 
were  sold  for  $18.00  a  pair."  At  this  early  period  these  figures  were  con- 
sidered enormous.  Within  four  years  from  the  time  when  this  paragraph  was 
written,  a  pair  of  my  Gray  Shanghaes,  sent  to  England  to  John  Baily,  Esq., 
of  London,  were  sold  at  the  Birmingham  Exhibition,  after  taking  first  prize 
there,  for  $500.00 ;  and  in  that  year,  and  subsequently,  one  to  two  hundred 
dollars  for  a  pair  of  good  Shanghaes  was  not  an  uncommon  price. 

The  uniformity  in  the  size  of  the  chickens  bred  in  America  during  the  first 
few  seasons  after  the  introduction  of  the  Shanghaes  here,  was  very  remarka- 
ble ;  and  this  alone  established  the  fact  that  the  stock  was,  beyond  cavil,  a 
distinct  race  of  birds.  The  weights  of  adult  specimens  at  that  time  did  not 
average  so  great  as  has  frequently  been  since  attained  by  American  fanciers 
quite  generally.  Seventeen  to  nineteen  pounds  per  pair,  cock  and  hen,  at 
twelve  months  old,  was  formerly  very  fair  and  quite  satisfactory.  Hundreds 
of  birds  were  raised  whose  weight  per  pair  did  not  reach  these  figures,  though 
it  not  infrequently  happened,  as  time  went  by,  to  hear  reports  of  "  a  big 
Shanghae  cock"  in  the  hands  of  Mr.  A,  B,  C,  or  D,- somewhere,  that  drew 
fourteen,  fifteen,  sixteen  pounds  alone.  I  never  saw  the  fowl  that  would  take 
down  the  steelyard  at  this  latter  weight,  though  others  affirm  —  Lewis  Wright 
among  these  vouchers  for  the  marvellous  —  that  "  single  cocks  have  been  bred 
weighing  over  eighteen  pounds ;  but  this  is  not  a  common  occurrence."  I 
should  say  not ! 

The  early  Shanghaes,  of  all  colors,  were  excellent  layers.  Hundreds  of 
veritable  instances  could  be  quoted  from  the  accounts  constantly  being  pub- 
lished in  the  press  during  1848  to  1855,  of  the  extraordinary  fertility  of  these 
hens.  The  Marsh,  Forbes,  and  Burnham  Shanghaes  were  notably  good  lay- 
ers. The  pullets  commenced  laying  at  six  to  seven  months  old  generally, 
though  many  instances  occurred  of  their  beginning  to  lay  at  five  or  five  and  a 
half  months.    This  is  the  fair  average  with  the  "  Cochins  "  of  to-day ;  and  upon 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  29 

this  topic,  in  "  The  Massachusetts  Ploughman  "  of  1849,  I  find  an  article  of 
mine,  contributed  to  that  journal  on  this  subject,  which  I  reproduce  here, 
that  gives  a  very  fair  description  of  these  fowls  as  I  saw  them  more  than 
twenty-five  years  since.  The  reader  will  perceive  that  the  "  Cochins  "  of  our 
time  are  pretty  accurately  described  in  this  extract,  written  by  the  author  of 
this  present  volume  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago :  — 

"I  am  confident  that  the  Shanghae  fowls  are  confounded  with  the  Cochin 
Chinas  ;  and  I  think  that  some  persons  who  have  the  stock,  call  both  by  this 
name.  We  have  not  had  the  Shanghaes  in  America  long  enough  yet,  nor  is 
the  distinction  sufficiently  well  known,  I  imagine,  to  determine  between  the 
real  Shanghae  and  the  Cochin  Chinas  we  now  have  here,  and  more  commonly 
called  by  this  last  name.  I  make  the  distinction  on  the  ground  that  my  im- 
ported Shanghaes  (and  I  have  now  three  different  varieties,  from  different 
sources)  are  all  heavily  feathered  upon  the  legs,  while  my  "  Cochin  China 
fowls,  which  I  consider  possess  all  the  good  points  that  any  specimens  classed 
under  that  name  do,  have  no  feathers  on  the  legs.  The  Shanghaes  come  from 
the  extreme  north  of  China,  fifteen  hundred  miles  up  the  coast.  The  'Cochin 
Chinas,'  now  so  called,  it  is  said  originated  in  a  country  of  that  name  in  a 
far  more  southerly  latitude." 

(These  two  locations  can  be  seen  upon  reference  to  the  map,  on  page  15.) 
The  theory  we  all  held  to  at  that  early  period  was,  in  substance,  that  nature 
provided  for  the  northern  fowls,  where  the  climate  was  coldest,  this  coating 
or  leg-feathering  as  a  protection  to  the  elongated  shanks  of  the  Shanghaes ; 
while  the  "  Cochin  Chinas  "  (represented  in  those  years  by  the  Queen's  stock, 
thus  misnamed),  it  was  said,  came  from  this  extreme  southern  province  of 
Chinese  territory,  and  did  not  need  this  feature  in  their  formation.  But  all 
this  was  merely  theory,  and  had  no  basis,  as  we  shall  see  anon. 

The  article  from  which  I  quote  (and  which  was  deemed  of  sufficient  im- 
portance at  the  time  to  be  transferred  entire  to  the  pages  of  Dr.  John  C. 
Bennett's  "  Poultry  Book,"  published  in  1850-'51,  by  Phillips  &  Sampson,  at 
Boston,)  continues  thus :  "  There  are  very  few,  if  any,  bona  fide  Shanghae 
fowls  at  present  for  sale  in  this  region.  Hundreds  of  so-called  'Shanghaes 
are  offered  every  week ;  but  this  breed  is  now  altogether  too  rare,  and  the  real 
'  Simon  Pure '  will  readily  command  too  high  a  price  at  private  sale,  for  these 
genuine  birds  to  be  very  common  at  present.  The  coming  year  there  will  be 
more  of  them.      And  for   the  farmer,    the   poulterer,   the  breeder,   or  the 


30  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

fancier,  I  consider  this  fowl,  in  its  purity,  one  of  the  most  economical  and 
most  profitable  of  all  the  known  large  breeds  extant." 

Dr.  Bennett's  work,  in  1850,  is  embellished  with  handsome  illustrations, 
drawn  from  life,  of  my-  Shanghae  fowls,  of  which  the  drawing  on  p.  24  is 
pretty  accurate,  though  at  that  period  it  was  difficult  to  find  engravers  who 
could  so  artistically  portray  our  birds  as  do  those  who  succeeded  the  earlier 
draughtsmen  of  domestic  poultry. 

From  Dixon  and  Kerr's  "  Ornamental  and  Domestic  Poultry  Book,"  pub- 
lished in  Philadelphia  in  1850-51,  I  extract  the  following  account  of  my 
Shanghaes,  imported  in  1849,  and  communicated  by  me  to  that  work  :  — 

"From  my  own  importations,  last  season,  I  have  bred  several  very  fine 
specimens  of  pure  Shanghaes,  uniform  in  color  and  characteristics,  remarka- 
bly heavy  for  their  ages  —  the  cocks,  at  five  to  six  months  old,  drawing  eight 
and  a  half  to  nine  pounds,  and  pullets  of  same  age,  five  and  a  half  to  six  and 
a  half  pounds  each,  live  weight."  .  .  .  "  They  are  short-legged,  heavy-bodied, 
handsomely  plumed,  and  among  the  best  layers  I  have  ever  met  with."  .  .  . 
"  I  have  never  seen  their  equals  for  laying  early.  The  Shanghaes  commence 
to  lay  at  six  months  old ;  they  are  very  prolific,  lay  large  eggs,  and  a  great 
many  of  them."  .  .  .  "All  things  considered,  they  are  certainly  a  very  valua- 
ble species  of  domestic  fowl,  and  I  am  highly  pleased  with  them."  ..."  I 
have  now  on  the  way,  direct  from  Shanghae  and  Canton,  two  fresh  lots,  from 
which,  with  the  stock  I  have  now  reserved,  I  shall  breed  another  year.  These 
last  fowls  were  ordered  by  me  a  year  ago."  .  .  .  "For  all  the  purposes  of  a 
really  good  fowl,  whether  I  speak  of  beauty  of  model,  good  size,  or  laying 
qualities,  I  deem  the  thorough-bred  Shanghaes  among  the  very  best  and 
generally  most  profitable  of  domestic  birds." 

This  standard  poultry  book  of  that  period  describes  the  true  Shanghae  fowl 
imported  and  bred  in  those  early  years,  1847,  '48,  '49,  '50,  precisely  to  cor- 
respond in  features  with  the  so-called  "  Cochins  "  of  to-day,  in  detail  —  from 
"  single  upright,  serrated  comb,"  to  "  heavily  feathered  legs  down  to  the  tips 
of  toes."  And  the  authors  conclude  their  minute  description  of  this  fowl, 
then  coming  into  general  favor  everywhere,  as  being  "fully  plumed  with  soft 
downy  feathering,  in  size  of  great  proportions,  quiet  and  docile  in  temper, 
wonderful  layers,  making  flesh  rapidly  from  chickenhood,  and  we  know  not 
of  a  better.  In  truth,  we  may  say  of  the  Shanghae,  as  the  pious  Isaac  Walton 
was  wont  to  say  of  the  trout,  his  favorite  dish :  'God  certainly  might  have 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  3l 

made  a  better  fish,  but  certainly  he  never  did.7  So  of  the  pure  unadulterated 
Shanghae  fowl." 

Upon  page  13  will  be  seen  another  early  engraving  of  these  yellow  Shang- 
haes, which  will  show  what  the  general  form  and  appearance  of  this  stock 
was  in  1849,  '50,  '51.  By  domestication  in  England,  as  well  as  in  this  coun- 
try, and  through  subsequent  care  in  mating  and  selection,  improvement  in 
the  form,  a  notable  development  of  the  shape,  and  greatly  enhanced  propor- 
tions in  this  variety,  were  soon  realized  among  us.  The  various  strains  were 
bred  together,  from  time  to  time,  thus  introducing  and  intermingling  fresh 
blood  among  them  all,  and  increasing  their  general  size  and  desirable  good 
qualities,  remarkably ;  though  for  a  long  time  none  of  us  considered  color  an 
important  matter  —  so  that  the  progeny  of  our  increasing  flocks  sustained 
the  otherwise  general  characteristics  of  the  Chinese  race ;  for,  out  of  all  these 
earliest  importations,  there  came  every  shade  of  yellow,  red,  buff,  drab,  light 
cinnamon,  brown,  bronze,  and  almost  or  quite  black  chickens,  —  first  or  last, 
—  and  no  one  then  deemed  this  result  either  strange,  or  inappropriate.  We 
changed  all  that  in  the  later  years  of  our  experience,  of  course. 

In  Eev.  W.  Wingfield's  "London  Poultry  Book/'  a  splendicUy  illustrated 
octavo  issued  in  1853,  and  subsequently  in  1867  re-issued  under  the  editor- 
ship of  W.  B.  Tegetmeier,  F.Z.S.,  appear  numerous  large  and  finely-colored 
chromo  likenesses  of  noted  Chinese  fowls,  among  other  choice  illustrations ; 
at  that  time  each  being  designated,  in  the  title-line  below  these  beautiful  pic- 
tures, as  White  Shanghae,  Buff  Shanghae,  Lemon  Shanghae,  Partridge 
Shanghae,  &c.  In  the  later  edition  of  this  choice  work,  the  same  plates  are 
used  to  adorn  it  (under  charge  of  Mr.  Tegetmeier)  ;  but  in  each  title,  under- 
neath these  pictures,  the  word  "  Cochin  "  is  substituted  for  the  original  ap- 
pellation. The  birds  are  the  same,  however,  precisely;  and  similar  fine 
illustrations  of  my  original  Gray  Shanghaes  are  portrayed  among  the  rest, 
#and  are  there  de»ominated  Light  and  Dark  "Brahmas,"  to  correspond  with 
the  improved  nomenclature  of  our  time,  and  in  conformity  with  the  established 
names  for  the  China  fowls  adopted  in  the  English  and  American  "  Standards." 
From  the  Rev.  Mr.  Wingfield's  1853  edition  of  this  work,  we  extract  the  fol- 
lowing information  about  the  then  called  "  Shanghaes."  In  reference  to  the 
history  and  name  of  this  variety  of  the  China  species,  the  author  says,  — 

"  There  is  a  doubt,  which  had  better  be  removed  at  the  very  threshold, 


32 


THE  CHINA  FOWL. 


conveyed  in  the  question,  'Are  Cochin  China  and  Shanghae  fowls  the 
same?1  We  have  always  entertained  the  opinion  that  they  are;  and  since 
we  have  invariably  found  that  fowls  imported  from  China,  feathered  or  plain- 
legged,  dark-plumed  or  light,  came  hither,  directly  or  indirectly,  either  from 


BURNHAM'S  FIRST  DARK  GRAY  SHANGHAE  HEN,  SENT  TO  ENGLAND.     (1853.) 

Shanghae  or  its  immediate  vicinity,  we  have  long  since  concluded  that 
'  Cochin  China '  is  a  name  altogether  misapplied  to  this  variety.  This  con- 
clusion amounts  to  conviction,  since  we  have  received  a  letter  from  Mr. 
Robert  Fortune,  who  has  passed  so  many  years  in  various  parts  of  China,  in 
which  he  says,  — 


SHANQHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA,  33 

"'The  man  who  first  gave  these  fowls  the  name  of  "Cochin  Chinas"  has 
much  to  answer  for.  I  firmly  believe  that  what  are  termed  "  Cochins  n  and 
"  Shanghaes  "  are  one  and  the  same.  One  thing  is  certain  :  the  breed  you 
have  in  England  now  called  "  Cochin  Chinas  "  are  plentiful  in  and  around 
Shanghae.  They  were  discovered  there  soon  after  the  war,  and  were  fre- 
quently brought  to  England  by  captains  of  trading  vessels.  What  grounds 
has  any  one  for  supposing  these  fowls  ever  saw  Cochin  China  ?  This  is  a 
breed  little  known  in  the  warmer  country  about  Canton.  In  fact,  the  South- 
ern Chinese  people  were  as  much  struck  with  the  size  of  this  breed  as  Eng- 
lishmen were.  The  "Shanghaes"  seem  to  be  more  common  about  Shanghae 
than  anywhere  else  in  the  north  of  China.  The  Southern  breeds  have  long 
been  known  both  to  shipmasters  and  English  residents ;  but  there  is  noth- 
ing marked  in  the  character  of  the  Southern  China  birds/  " 

At  the  early  English  poultry-show  at  the  Zoological  Gardens,  London,  in 
1845,  prizes  were  offered  for  "  Malays  and  other  Asiatic  breeds."  These  offers 
drew  to  the  exhibition  no  Eastern  variety,  except-  the  long-time  known 
Malays.  Rev.  Mr.  Wingfield  remarks  upon  this  fact,  that  "  at  that  time 
the  Shanghaes  were  unknown  to  the  society."  No  extended  published  notice 
of  Chinese  birds  occurred  in  England  until  1845  or  '46,  although  the  Queen's 
fowls,  sent  her  by  the  British  ambassador  in  China  soon  after  the  close  of 
the  war  there,  reached  England  in  1844.  These  remarkable  fowls  (called 
"Cochin  Chinas")  were  exhibited  by  Her  Majesty  at  Dublin  first,  in  1846. 
Yet  Dickson,  the  English  poultry  author  of  that  time,  in  his  noted  work  pub- 
lished in  1847  makes  no  allusion  even  to  the  Queen's  fine  fowls.  Messrs.  Moody 
of  Droxford,  and  Sturgeon  of  Grays,  were  the  first  prominent  possessors  of 
the  Shanghaes  in  England,  to  both  of  whose  importations  we  have  already 
referred  on  a  previous  page.  From  these  two  consignments  came  all  the 
earlier  English  birds  of  this  species,  bred  for  many  years  on  the  other  side 
of  the  Atlantic.  Referring  to  the  Queen's  China  fowls,  we  will  add  here, 
that  if  the  name  "Cochin  China"  were  ever  appropriately  applied  to  any 
of  these  birds,  it  more  properly  belonged  to  that  single  importation  than  to 
any  other  known ;  since  these  were  smooth-legged,  and  of  a  different  forma- 
tion entirely,  as  we  shall  show  in  another  place,  when  we  come  to  the 
"  Cochin  "  portion  of  our  present  book. 

The  Chinese  attach  no  more  importance  to  purity  of  color,  or  to  accuracy 
in  breeding,  than  do  our  own  farmers  all  over  this  country  with  their  barn- 


34  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

door  fowls.  Indeed,  it  is  notorious  that  there  are  no  "poultry  fanciers/'  as 
we  recognize  this  term,  at  all  in  China.  Large  fowls  and  large  eggs  are  what 
the  barbarians  aim  for.  .  They  are  very  careless  in  breeding  poultry,  alto- 
gether ;  and  to  this  circumstance  are  we  indebted  for  the  various  colors  of  the 
progeny  of  even  the  "  imported  birds  "  we  get  from  that  clime.  Their  fowls 
are  permitted  to  run  all  together,  and  have  thus  been  bred  for  centuries. 
The  prevailing  natural  color  of  these  birds  is  from  pale  yellow  to  dark  brown. 
The  pure  White  and  Black  varieties  are  rarities,  it .  is  averred,  upon  Chinese 
soil ;  and  the  Grays  are  very  scarce  there :  so  our  own  friends  inform  us, 
whom  we  have  interested  to  make  search  for  us  more  than  once,  when  they 
have  left  this  shore  for  the  other,  with  our  urgent  orders  to  bring  back,  if 
possible,  upon  their  return,  a  fresh  batch  of  the  Grays,  which  have  become  so 
popular  in  the  past  twenty  years  here  and  in  England. 

And  may  we  not  just  here  appropriately  refer  to  the  remarkable  fact 
(wherever  the  original  Light  and  Dark  "  Gray  Shanghaes,"  at  present  called 
Brahmas,  came  from  in  the  first  instance),  that  never  since  1849  and  1850, 
from  any  country,  in  any  ship,  to  any  port  in  England  or  America,  has  a 
second  clutch  of  these  beautiful  Grays  chanced  to  reach  the  shores  of  the 
Western  Continent? 

In  all  our  "  importations,"  in  all  our  purchases,  in  all  our  chance  posses- 
sions of  Chinese,  Eastern,  India,  Calcutta,  or  Malay  birds,  never  once  since 
the  introduction  by  G.  P.  Burnham  of  the  Gray  Shanghaes  to  notice  in 
America,  in  1849  and  1850,  have  we  had  any  more  of  them.  If  this  variety 
were  so  "  plentiful  in  India "  as  Lewis  Wright  asserts  they  are  and  have 
been,  and  if  the  very  doubtful  statement  of  his  quoted  "  East  Indian 
officer"  had  any  real  foundation  in  fact,  why  have  we  not  had  a  few  more 
of  the  original  "  up  the  Brahmapootra  "  birds,  either  in  England  or  America, 
during  all  the  long  years  that  have  elapsed  since  Burnham's  early  two 
importations  of  Gray  Shanghaes  in  1849  and  1850  were  shown  to  the  public, 
from  which  seven  fowls  have  descended  direct,  in  Great  Britain  and  the 
United  States,  the  myriads  of  Light  and  Dark  Brahmas  (now  thus  called) 
to-day  in  possession  of  the  thousands  of  breeders,  fanciers,  and  poulterers 
throughout  the  world  ? 

The  fallacious  theory  of  Lewis  Wright  —  that  all  the  multitudes  of  Light 
and  Dark  Brahma  fowls  now  in  existence,  and  the  other  myriad  of  Brahmas 


MODEL   OF  A   "STANDARD"   LIGHT   BRAHMA   PULLET,   15   MONTHS  OLD. 

As  bred  by  J.  M.  Wade  and  W.  E.  Flower,  Penn. ;    Messrs.  Plaisted,  Stoddard,  Carpenter,  etc.,  Conn. 
Messrs.  Sturtevant,  Williams,  Comey,  Felch,  Buzzell,  and  others,  Mass  ,  1874 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  37 

which  have  had  their  birth  within  the  last  twenty-five  years,  in  both 
America  and  England,  "  have  been  derived  from  the  '  one  pair '  introduced 
into  Connecticut  by  Mr.  Chamberlin" —  is  too  ridiculous  for  a  moment's 
serious  consideration.  That  so  many  hundreds  of  thousands  of  birds,  so 
like  each  other  in  all  their  chief  features  of  color,  size,  form,  and  common 
characteristics,  could  have  been  produced  from  a  single  cock  and  hen  and 
their  progeny,  only  ;  or  that  for  a  quarter  of  a  century,  without  the  slightest 
deterioration  in  any  important  particular,  one  pair  of  fowls  and  their  de- 
scendants could  ha,ve  been  bred  thus  in-and-in,  in- the  hands  of  thousands  of 
different  persons  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic,  to  result  thus  accurately  in 
feather,  shape,  proportions,  and  rare  quality,  —  is  simply  one  of  the  natural 
impossibilities.  Therefore  do  I  claim  that  the  union  of  my  original  pair  of 
Gray  Shanghaes  in  1849,  re-enforced  with  the  fresh,  strong,  native  blood 
of  my  second  lot  of  five  Grays  from  Shanghae  direct  in  1850,  more  clearly 
and  reasonably  a  hundred-fold  demonstrates  that  out  of  those  birds  come 
the  progeny  which  have  been  the  fathers  and  mothers  of  the  multiplied 
numbers  of  so-called  Light  and  Dark  "  Brahmas  "  which  have  been  pro- 
duced within  the  last  two  decades  of  years,  in  England  and  America. 

Now,  I  contend  that  this  is  a  very  extraordinary  fact.  And  upon  this  point 
well  may  the  talented  correspondent  of  Miss  Watts's  London  "  Poultry 
Yard"  exclaim,  "There  has,  then,  been  no  introduction  of  fresh  blood. 
Marvellous  birds  they  are,  to  go  on  with  so  little  appearance  of  degeneracy ; 
and  it  speaks  much  for  the  purity  of  the  breed  :  for,  were  they  made  up  of 
a  cross,  they  would  certainly  throw  back."  There  has  been  no  need  for 
crossing  this  fowl.  They  were  all  evidently  of  pure  Chinese  extraction. 
Their  "  pedigree  "  dates  back  clearly  to  1849  and  1850,  their  nativity  to 
China;  and  to-day  the  Gray  Shanghaes  breed  as  they  did  in  1851,  ?52,  ?53, 
and  afterwards.  They  are  marvellous,  indeed  ;  and  we  have  none  of  us  ever 
since  imported  any  others'of  the  species  !  Which  is  quite  as  "marvellous"  a 
fact  as  is  the  other. 

Like  the  imported  Buff,  the  Bed,  the  Brown,  or  the  Partridge,  already 
described,  the  Gray  Shanghaes  continue  to  breed  their  like,  uninterruptedly. 
And  in  the  year  1874,  at  the  Boston,  Hartford,  and  Buffalo  exhibitions 
(especially  at  the  two  first-named  shows),  the  identical  form,  color,  style, 
shape,  and  general  characteristics  of  this  "  marvellous  n  race  were  seen  in 
the  birds  there  shown,  as  we  of  "ye  olden  time  n  have  seen  them  by  scores 


38 


THE  CHINA  FOWL. 


and  hundreds  in  the  days  when  we  bore  away  the  palm  over  all  competitors, 
with  our  splendid  adult  samples  of  this  unique  variety  of  Shanghaes. 

The  White  Shanghae  is  another  variety  of  this  fowl,  which  deservedly 
has  hosts  of  ardent  admirers.  The  first  of  this  species  within  our  re- 
membrance were  in  possession  of  Geo.  E.  White,  Esq.,  of  the  firm  of  Parker 


Jtow/rsL  s  vsiim/is 


WHITE  SHANGHAE    (OR  "  COCHIN  ")    COCK  AND  HEN. 


and  White,  Boston.  These  are  portrayed  in  Dr.  Bennett's  work  (1850),  and 
are  there  described  as  an  exquisitely  beautiful  variety  of  Shanghaes,  —  pure 
white  in  color,  and  formed  precisely  similar  to  the  Yellow  and  Bed  varieties, 
better  known  among  fanciers  at  that  period.  Mr.  T.  Thorpe  of  Cambridge, 
Mass.,  imported,  or  purchased  of  the  importer,  the  first  of  this  race  we  had 
in  those  days  in  Boston.  We  present  a  picture  of  a  cock  and  hen  of  this 
variety,  which  represents  them  very  fairly.     They  partake  of  all  the  charac- 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  39 

teristics  of  the  genuine  Shanghae  species,  in  a  marked  degree,  except  the 
change  in  color.  They  are  a  beautiful  fowl  in  every  respect,  and  have  many 
favorites  among  the  fancy.  At  the  present  time,  the  White  Shanghae  is  very 
perfectly  bred  all  over  this  country,  and  many  strains  have  been  vastly  im- 
proved in  size  since  the  early  importations.  Fine  samples  have  been  sent  out 
to  us  from  England,  also,  in  the  past  few  years,  —  such  as  were  never  before 
seen  in  this  country,  so  far  as  the  average  weight  and  proportions  of  this 
variety  are  considered.     Mr.  Mark  Pitman,  of  Salem,  has  a  superior  strain. 

The  introduction  of  White  Shanghaes  into  Great  Britain  is  traceable  to  the 
breeds  of  the  Dean  of  Worcester,  and  Mr.  Herbert  of  Powick.  At  this 
period  (1851-'52)  there  were  but  very  few  in  England,  and  large  prices  were 
paid  for  good  specimens  for  breeding  purposes.  Now  they  are  plentiful  in 
that  country,  where  they  are  bred  to  great  perfection.  They  are  not  gen- 
erally considered  so  hardy  as  are  other  colored  Shanghaes  ;  and  the  chickens 
are  usually  more  difficult  to  raise  than  the  others.  Nor  do  they  reach  the 
weights  of  either  the  Grays  or  the  Buffs.  Mr.  Bowman  of  Penzance,  Eng., 
has,  however,  succeeded  in  raising  a  good  many  magnificent  White  Shang- 
haes, and  his  strain  is  very  popular,  as  are  Mr.  Todd's,  of  Ohio,  also. 

The  Black  Shanghae  is  less  common  among  us  than  any  other  variety. 
In  1850,  at  the  time  we  obtained  through  Wm.  T.  Porter  from  Shanghae 
our  second  lot  of  Light  Gray  birds,  we  found  an  excellent  trio  (cock  and  two 
hens)  of  the  Black  variety;  which,  with  the  five  Light  Grays  then  obtained, 
and  a  splendid  trio  of  Dark  brown  birds,  we  took  to  Melrose  to  breed.  The 
Black  ones  bred  true  to  the  originals,  and  were  of  the  best  color  (for  their 
dusky  metallic  hue)  that  we  ever  saw.  We  did  not  fancy  them  greatly,  how- 
ever, and  bred  them  only  one  or  two  seasons.  We  give  portraits  of  the 
Black  birds  here  ;  and  it  will  be  seen  that,  excepting  the  change  of  color, 
again,  they  represent  the  same  formed  fowl,  from  beak  to  toes,  —  the  true 
Shanghae,  though  ebony-hued. 

Eor  several  years,  through  the  adoption  of  this  title  in  England  by  the 
poultry  societies  and  clubs,  all  these  different  colored  Shanghaes  have  come 
to  be  called  "  Cochins ;  "  and  under  this  name  only  are  they  now  recognized 
in  the  Standards  on  both  sides  of  the  water.  This  is  quite  as  well ;  though, 
as  Mr.  Robert  Fortune  insists,  "  this  stock  never  saw  Cochin  China,"  and 
what  we  all  now  call  "  Cochins,"  in  England  and  America,  are  in  reality 
but  the  true  northern  Shanghae  race. 


40 


THE  CHINA  FOWL. 


But  a  correspondent  in  a  late  American  poultry  journal  puts  this  point 
sensibly.  He  says,  "  For  my  part,  I  prefer  to  see  men  up  with  the  times, 
who  have  an  '  axe  to  grind ?  in  coming  to  the  front  as  breeders  of  to-day,  of 
fowls  as  they  are  now,  not  the  antiquated  breeds  of  thirty  years  ago." 


BLACK  SHANGHAE  (OR  "COCHIN")   COCK  AND  HEN. 

Correct !  This  is  good  doctrine ;  and  to  this,  even  we  old  7uns  will  all 
respond  "  Amen ; "  while,  at  the  same  time,  the  "few  varieties  "  of  Chinese 
fowls  (alluded  to  by  this  writer),  known  in  the  antiquated  time  of  1847  to 
1852,  have  not  been  increased,  I  notice,  by  the  receipt  of  any  one  additional 
or  new  variety  from  that  heathen  land.  We  still  have  the  White,  the  Buff, 
the  Drab,  the  Silver  Cinnamon,  the  Gray,  the  Yellow,  the  Partridge,  the 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,   BRAHMA.  41 

Grouse,  and  the  Black ;  and  all  these  gentlemen,  who  are  so  commendably 
"  up  with  the  times,"  are  now  breeding  from  the  very  identical  stock  in  their 
"  modem  experience  "  that  we  ancient  fogies  "  imported  and  exported  and 
wrote  books  about,"  in  the  "  antiquated  days  of  twenty  or  thirty  years  ago." 
This  early  stock  has  been  improved  somewhat  in  the  later  time  ;  and  no- 
body need  now  object  to  the  change  in  its  name  to  suit  the  modern  fancy, 
since  the  Shanghae  fowl  itself  has  never  yet  been  changed  materially  in  its 
general  good  qualities  and  characteristics,  and  probably  never  will  be.  It 
was  good  enough  originally :  it  is  good  enough  now.  We  will  now  call  it 
"  Cochin,"  therefore,  contentedly,  and  herein  follow,  where  in  the  u  days 
lang  syne  "  we  led.  Still  this  fowl  remains  unchanged,  although  some  later 
writers  assume  that  both  the  Brahmas  and  the  Cochins  are  an  entirely  differ- 
ent variety  from  the  Shanghaes. 

Mere  theories,  like  those  of  Lewis  Wright,  may  be  promulgated,  and  these 
may  be  rendered  plausible  by  argument.  But  recorded  facts  cannot  be 
ignored ;  and  in  connection  with  this  point  let  me  quote  briefly  from  the 
*  report  of  the  judges  of  the  old  New-England  Poultry  Society,  made  at  their 
third  and  fourth  exhibitions  in  Boston,  Mass.  This  exhibition  was  a  fine 
one,  and  the  entries  were  very  large.  The  Committee  of  Judges  say,  offi- 
cially, "  At  this  Boston  show,  the  best  and  most  faultless  descriptions  of 
Red  and  Buff  Shanghaes  were  shown  by  Geo.  P.  Burnham,  Esq.,  of  Melrose. 
And,  of  the  Cochin  Chinas,  the  specimens  exhibited  by  G.  P.  Burnham  were 
each  and  all  notable,  and  worthy  of  public  appreciation."  This  in  May, 
1852.  At  the  last  show  of  this  Society,  where  I  did  not  enter  any  fowls  for 
premium,  but  only  on  exhibition,  which  came  off  the  same  year  (1852)  in 
the  fall,  the  judges,  in  their  published  report,  call  attention  to  the  fact  that 
among  the  numerous  fowls  exhibited  this  season,  as  upon  former  occasions 
(noticeably  in  1850  and  1851),  a  very  unnecessary  practice  seems  to  have 
obtained  in  the  misnaming  of  varieties,  and  recommend  a  close  adherence 
hereafter  to  recognized  titles  only.     ' 

In  this  connection  they  allude  to  cases  in  point.  "  The  largest  and  unques- 
tionably one  of  the  finest  varieties  of  fowls  ever  shown  among  us,  was  entered 
by  the  owner  of  this  variety  as  Chittagong.*     Other  coops  of  the  very  same 

*  These  were  the  old  Gray  Shanghae  pair  I  sold  to  Dr.  Bennett.  Entered  at  this  show 
by  G.  W.  George  of  Haverhill,  to  whom  the  Doctor  sold  them,  after  he  bred  them  one 
season.    They  were  first  shown  by  me,  in  1849,  at  Boston. 


42  TEE  CHINA  FOWL. 

stock  were  labelled  Gray  Chittagongs ; #  others  were  called  Brahma-Poo- 
tras ;  f  others,  from  the  same  original  birds,  $  were  Gray  Shanghaes,  &c. 
Your  Coniniittee  are  divided  in  opinion  as  to  what  these  birds  ought  right- 
fully be  called ;  though  the  majority  of  the  Committee  have  no  idea  that 
;  Brahma-Pootra '  is  their  correct  title.  Several  cages  contained  specimens 
positively  known  to  have  come  direct  from  Shanghae,  §  and  none  are  known 
to  have  come  originally  from'  anywhere  else.  Nevertheless,  it  is  thought 
proper  to  leave  this  question  open  for  the  present;  and  the  Committee  accept 
for  them  the  title  of  Gray  Shanghae,  Chittagong,  or  i  Brahma-Pootra,'  as 
different  breeders  may  elect,  for  the  present,  admitting  that  they  are  really  a 
very  superior  bird,  and  will  be  found  decidedly  the  most  valuable  among  all 
the  large  Chinese  fowls,  of  which  they  are  clearly  a  very  good  variety." 

This,  mark,  in  the  spring  and  fall  of  1852,  at  the  Boston  Fowl  Shows, 
where  I  did  not  enter  the  first  fowl  for  competition.  And,  farther  on  in  this 
Committee  of  Judges'  Report  (above  quoted  from),  the  following  extracts  are 
to  the  point :  — 

"  Samples  of  the  China  stock,  imported  originally  from  Shanghae,  were 
very  plentiful  on  this  occasion,  and  very  superior  fowls,  bred  from  G.  P. 
Burnham's  importations,  were  numerous,  and  were  sold  in  four  or  five  instan- 
ces at  the  very  highest  prices  paid  for  any  samples  disposed  of."  Among 
the  premiums  awarded,  as  per  report,  at  this  fourth  show  (in  1852),  were  the 
"  first  prizes  for  best  trio,  to  H.  H.  Williams  (Burnham's  stock)  \  first  for 
best  cock  and  hen,  to  Chas.  Sampson  (Burnham's  stock)  ;  second  and  third 
prizes  to  Williams,  same  (Burnham's  stock)  ;  a  first  prize  to  C.  C.  Plaisted, 
for  l  Hong  Kong '  fowls,  then  so  called  by  contributor  (from  Burnham's 
stock) ;  to  A.  White,  six  best  chickens  (Burnham's  stock)  ;  to  same,  for  best 
Cochin  cock  and  hen,  first  prize  (Burnham's  stock) ;  to  Williams,  West 
Roxbury,  best  trio  of  Cochins,  first  premium  (Burnham's  stock)  ;  to  A. 
White,  East  Randolph,  for  best  Cochin  chickens,  first  (Burnham's  stock),"  &c. 

*  These  were  called  Cornish  fowls,  contributed  by  Hatch  of  Connecticut ;  and  very 
good  ones  they  were  too,  but  all  young  birds. 

f  These  were  Dr.  Bennett's  first  ones,  bred  from  my  old  Philadelphia  Grays,  which  I 
sold  him  the  previous  year.     Shown  the  second  time. 

$  These  were  my  Light  and  Dark  Gray  fowls,  and  their  progeny. 

§  These  were  my  oldest  imported  Grays,  and  other  fowls. 


SHANGHAE,  COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  43 

All  this  is  somewhat  of  a  personal  character ;  but  I  am  now  writing  of  the 
old  days,  of  events  in  chicken-history  that  occurred  over  twenty  years  since. 
From  the  above  data,  it  will  be  seen  that  several  months  prior  to  the  time 
(December,  1852,)  when  I  shipped  the  mature  "Gray  Shanghaes"  to  Her 
Majesty,  Queen  Victoria,  to  wit,  in  the  spring  of  1852,  I  exhibited  old  Shang- 
hae  fowls,  and  their  progeny  three,  two,  and  one  year  old.  In  the  fall  of  the 
same  year,  my  patrons,  who  had  bred  fowls  from  Cochin  or  Shanghae  chick- 
ens, or  eggs  purchased  of  me  in  1850,  1851,  carried  away  all  the  leading  pre- 
miums with  this  young  stock  of  the  Grays,  Reds,  Buffs,  &c. ;  and  not  until  the 
year  1852  (in  September)  had  the  proper  name  of  this  fine  stock  been  called 
in  question.  It  was  rightfully  "  Shanghae."  But  from  and  after  this  show 
began  the  contest  that  resulted  in  naming  this  much-maligned  race  "  Brah- 
mas  "  and  "  Cochins,"  of  different  colors ;  though  I  continued  to  call  my  stock 
"  Shanghaes  "  for  many  years  afterwards. 

Englishmen  (through  the  Queen's  Chinese  fowls)  had,  previously  to  this 
time,  for  four  or  five  years,  been  breeding  what  they  called  "Cochin  Chinas  ; " 
and  this  name  had  come  to  be  accepted  by  the  Society  members  and  British 
poultry  clubs  as  "  the  thing,  you  know,"  in  the  course  of  a  few  years  later. 
Meantime,  early  American  breeders  of  the  Marsh,  Forbes,  and  Burnham 
Shanghaes  had  begun  to  find  a  very  good  market  in  England  for  selected 
samples  of  these  strains,  and"  especially  of  the  Gray  Shanghaes ;  and  Dr.  Ben- 
nett, Mr.  Plaisted,  Capt.  Williams,  W.  Buckminster,  and  myself  sent  hun-^ 
dreds  of  pairs  and  trios  of  this  Shanghae  stock  abroad,  to  the  delight  and 
astonishment  of  the  fanciers  in  Great  Britain. 

It  has  been  lately  stated,  I  observe,  that  in  1854  and  1857  some  importa- 
tions of  fowls  were  made  into  England  direct  from  Shanghae,  —  Partridge- 
colored,  I  think.  But  the  English  breeders  persisted  in  calling  the  Gray 
Shanghaes  they  got  from  America  (as  they  did  these  last-named  birds  from 
that  port)  Cochins,  or  Brahmas.  No  longer  Cochin  Chinas  as  at  first,  never 
latterly  Shanghaes  (what  they  were),  but  Cochins  or  Brahmas,  tbey  said. 
And  to-day  "so  say  we  all;"  though  I  had  always  contended  for  the  one  true 
name  "•  Shanghaes  "  of  different  colors. 

The  Shanghaes  have  been  fearfully  abused  and  maligned  —  on  paper  —  in 
past  years.  They  were  called  homely,  gawky,  ravenous,  clumsy,  ill-favored, 
long-legged  monsters ;   and  though  everybody  was  at  once  astonished  and 


44  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

interested,  in  greater  or  less  degree,  at  this  novelty  among  chickens  when  it 
appeared,  but  few  fanciers  took  hold  of  it  at  first  with  any  zeal.  The  breed 
worked  its  own  way,  however ;  and  after  a  year  or  two,  despite  the  abuse  and 
ridicule  and  nicknaming  heaped  upon  it  privately  and  publicly,  it  came  to 
be  largely  sought  for ;  and  a  rare  furore  eventually  succeeded,  to  obtain  good 
samples  of  these  Shanghaes  in  England,  as  well  as  all  over  this  country. 

Now,  the  originally  imported  Shanghae  fowl,  of  different  colors  (not  the 
original  Queen's  Cochin  Chinas),  was  in  no  particular  different  from  the  so- 
denominated  Cochin  of  to-day.  The  requirements  of  the  Standards  here  and 
in  England  describe  the  same  points  possessed  by  the  early  birds,  almost  pre- 
cisely ;  and  old  breeders,  who  have  watched  the  progress  in  poultry  "  improve- 
ments "  here  and  abroad  for  twenty-five  years,  know  this.     But 

v  "  What's  in  a  name  ?    That  which  we  call  a  rose, 

By  any  other  name  would  smell  as  sweet." 

I  notice  in  Mr.  Wright's  latest  work  on  poultry  that  Mr.  Cornish,  under 
date  of  a  letter  to  Col.  Weld  in  1869,  states  (among  other  gross  inaccuracies 
in  said  letter)  that  "in  1850  the  name  i Brahmapootra'  was  established." 
And  farther  on,  Mr.  Wright  says  that  "this  was  the  stock  fostered  by  Mr. 
Cornish  and  Dr.  Bennett."  But  in  Dr.  Bennett's  own  "Poultry  Book,"  pub- 
lished in  Boston  in  1850,  the  name  of  Brahma  or  Brahmapootra  is  not 
alluded  to,  once ;  while  my  original  Philadelphia  (Dr.  J.  J.  Kerr)  "  Gray  Shang- 
haes," then  called  by  Drs.  Kerr  and  Bennett  "  Chittagongs  "  (precisely  as 
Cornish  calls'  his  stock,  in  his  March  2d,  1852,  letter),  are  both  finely  illus- 
trated, and  are  fully  described  by  Bennett,  see  pp.  26,  27,  28,  as  "perfect 
samples,"  "  remarkable  for  size  and  beauty,"  "  the  first  among  domestic 
varieties  of  fowls,"  " the  true  gallus  giganteus"  and  they  " excite  astonish- 
ment and  admiration  in  all  fowl  fanciers  who  behold  them,"  &c.  At  the 
close  of  this  book  —  last  page  —  Dr.  Bennett  adds,  "It  will  be  observed  that 
the  descriptions  in  this  work  begin  with  Mr.  Burnham's  imperial  Gray  Chit- 
tagong,"  &c.  Now,  if  (as  Cornish  says)  this  "Brahma"  name  was  "estab- 
lished in  1850,"  why  does  not  Dr.  Bennett  (who  originated  it)  somewhere  in 
his  extensive  "  Poultry  Book "  mention  it  ?  Mr.  Cornish  or  his  fowls,  of 
course,  were  not  then  known  to  anybody ;  for  Bennett  was  the  first  man  in 
America  to  broach  this  subject  of  a  new-fangled  name  for  the  fine  Gray 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  45 

Shanghae  birds;  and  Wright  admits  this.  This  is  but  another  mistake  of 
Cornish's,  in  the  date  of  the  year.     And  one  word  more  upon  this  point :  — 

'As  far  forward  from  this  time  as  in  1854,  the  judges  at  the  National  Exhi- 
bition in  New  York,  in  their  official  report  on  that  Show,  say,  "  Though  we 
have  been  governed  by  the  nomenclature  in  the  lists,  we  by  no  means  assent 
to  it  as  a  proper  classification.  Shanghae  and  Cochin  are  convertible  terms  ; 
but  Brahmapootra  is  a  name  for  a  sub-variety  of  Shanghaes,  plainly."  And 
"we  earnestly  insist  that  all  ridiculous,  unmeaning  aliases  for  fowls  be  aban- 
doned, and  a  simple,  truthful  classification  in  name  be  strictly  observed  in 
the  future,"  &c.  Compare  this  with  my  quotations  above  from  the  Boston 
judges'  report  in  1852,  and  then  let  anybody  declare,  if  they  can  truthfully, 
that  "  this  name  '  Brahma '  was  established  in  1850." 

This,  of  course,  could  not  be.  But  I  shall  explain  this  point  further,  in  my 
future  pages.  I  allude  to  it  here,  because  it  is  the  Shanghae  fowl  that  I 
have  now  been  writing  of,  o£  different  colors  —  the  Gray  variety  among  this 
class  —  whose  name  the  "Tichborne  claimants"  of  1852,  1853  (sustained 
by  Lewis  Wright's  sophistical  theory),  have  for  years  been  busy  in  changing 
from  its  true  title,  transforming  it  from  the  original  to  the  modern  names. 

Thus  we  may  learn,  that  in  spite  of  all  the  changes  from  time  to  time  that 
have  occurred  in  the  nomenclature  of  the  China  fowl,  the  bird  itself  remains 
the  same  that  first  came  into  England  or  America  from  the  principal  port  of 
the  Chinese  Empire.  For  years,  as  I  have  already  stated,  no  one  could 
declare  with  any  confidence  that  "Shanghaes"  were  not  "Cochins,"  or  vice 
versa.  At  that  early  period  in  chicken-raising  in  the  United  States,  very 
few  persons  knew  any  thing  of  the  real  facts  about  this  race  ;  and  we  begun 
to  ape  the  Britons  with  the  "  Cochin  China  "  title,  as  the  most  euphonious. 
But  when  importation  after  importation  arrived  here,  and  all  of  these  came 
from  Shanghae  only,  we  commenced  to  learn  to  "  call  things  by  their  right 


names." 


And  this  brings  us  to  consider  the  so-called  Cochin  variety,  by  itself,  in 
another  chapter. 


THE   COCHINS. 


The  "  Cochin  China  "  fowl,  as  it  was  originally  known  in  England  and  in 
the  United  States,  was  altogether  a  different  bird,  in  shape  and  characteris- 
tics generally,  from  what  is  denominated  at  the  present  day  "Cochin"  by 
societies  and  poultry  fanciers  of  our  time.  This  bird  originated  in  China, 
however;  the  first  (and  only  exact)  samples  of  which  were  procured  at 
Shanghae,  and  were  shipped  from  that  coast-port  direct  to  England  in  a 
British  government  vessel,  soon  after  the  close  of  the  war  in  that  country 
(when  the  Chinese  trading-ports  were  first  opened  to  British  and  other 
foreign  commerce),  by  the  then  resident  English  ambassador  to  the  Chinese 
court,  as  a  present  to  Her  Majesty,  Queen  Victoria. 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  47 

As  we  have  already  stated  in  these  pages,  these  birds  were  really  smooth- 
legged  Shanghae  fowls.  Still  their  precise  origin  is  involved  in  mystery 
not  unlike  that  claimed  by  certain  parties  regarding  the  early  history  of  the 
"  Brahmapootras,"  so  far  as  any  thing  has  ever  been  vouchsafed  to  the  public 
in  actual  detail.  Her  Majesty  was  known  to  evince  a  lively  interest  in 
poultry  matters  at  the  "  Home  Farm,"  Windsor,  however,  as  did  his  Eoyal 
Highness  Albert,  the  late  Prince-Consort,  in  agricultural  affairs.  And  the 
British  minister  in  1843  secured  what  he  supposed  unquestionably  to  be  a 
very  choice  lot  of  the  colossal  poultry  of  China,  which  he  sent  to  London 
for  the  Queen's  world-renowned  aviary. 

Now,  it  is  very  clear  that,  whatever  may  have  been  the  good  quality  of  this 
ambassador's  general  talents,  and  his  profundity  as  a  statesman,  he  evidently 
possessed  very  slight  knowledge  of  the  points  or  excellences  of  what  fanciers 
would  call  good  poultry ;  pre-supposing  that  this  distinguished  diplomatist 
had  any  choice  presented  him  in  the  selection  of  the  birds  he  thus  sent  from 
China  to  his  queen.  For,  as  we  may  readily  see  by  examining  the  authen- 
tic illustration  by  Harrison  Weir  (in  1844),  which  is  transferred  to  our 
pages  from  "The  London  Illustrated  News,"  of  a  trio  of  the  "famous 
Queen's  Cochins "  (see  opposite  page),  these  long-legged,  smooth-shanked, 
gawky  gallinaceous  representatives  from  the  Celestial  dominions  were  really 
any  thing  but  what  would  be  esteemed,  by  the  veriest  amateur,  a  desirable 
acquisition  for  his  poultry-yard,  in  our  day.  Still  the  monstrous  proportions 
of  these  fowls  astonished  the  people  of  England  vastly;  and  the  English 
illustrated  journals  were  shortly  occupied  with  pictures  and  accounts  of  these 
giant  chickens,  which  were  a  huge  novelty  to  Messrs.  John  Bull. 

They  were  wonderful  in  dimensions  and  carriage,  extraordinary  layers 
(Mr.  Walters,  the  Queen's  poultry-keeper,  verifying  some  one's  curious  state- 
ment that  "  the  hens  laid  two  eggs  in  a  day  frequently,  and  sometimes 
three")  ;  they  were  hardy,  flame-colored,  very  quiet,  and  altogether  were  a 
most  valuable  acquisition  to  the  poultr}^  of  the  Old  Country,  as  everybody, 
on  sight  of  them,  admitted.  These  "  Cochins  "  were  perfectty  smooth-legged ; 
and  Harrison  Weir's  pictures  of  them  in  "  The  London  Illustrated  News," 
"  by  royal  permission,"  were  very  accurate  portraits  of  this  rare  consignment, 
which  at  that  time  (1844)  were  described  as  belonging  to  the  family  of  the 
Otis  tarda,  or  Great  Bustard,  from  their  kindred  formation  and  immense 
size,  —  though  this  early  notion  was  erroneous,  also. 


48 


THE  CHINA   FOWL. 


queen  victoria's  oeiginal  "  cochin  chinas."     {Drawn  by  Harrison  Weir,  1844.) 


SHANGHAE,  COCHIN,   BRAHMA.  49 

I  read  these  accounts,  saw  the  engravings  in  the  London  papers,  and  in 
1848  sent  to  England  for  half  a  dozen  of  them.  The  Queen  presented  a  prize 
pair  to  Lord  Heytsbury,  then  lord-lieutenant  of  Ireland  ;  and  he  sent  them 
to  J.  Joseph  Nolan  of  Bachelor's  Walk,  Dublin,  to  breed.  I  communicated 
with  Mr.  Nolan,  and  finally  purchased  two  cocks  and  four  pullets  of  this 
Queen  Victoria  "  Cochin  China "  stock,  which  were  the  first  Cochins  im- 
ported into  America  by  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  by  at  least  two  years 
in  point  of  time.  I  bred  these  smooth-legged  fowls,  with  others  that  I  re- 
ceived subsequently  from  Canton,  for  several  years,  and  disposed  of  hundreds 
of  fine  birds  from  this  stock ;  though  I  never  thought  them  equal  to  the  Gray 
Shanghaes  (or  Brahmas)  by  a  long  mark,  from  after  experience. 

These  were  the  original  "  Cochins,"  however.  They  were  so  called  by  the 
English  breeders,  and  this  name,  for  the  Queen's  stock,  was  never  changed. 
Why  they  were'  denominated  "  Cochin  Chinas,"  no  one  has  ever  yet  been 
able  to  determine.  Certainly  they  never  saw  Cochin  China ;  and  nobody  in 
that  Southern  Chinese  province  ever  saw  any  such  fowls  there.  Mr.  For- 
tune, who  was  for  a  long  time  a  resident  and  traveller  in  the  East,  says  that 
"  whoever  thus  named  these  birds  has  much  to  answer  for,  since  denizens  of 
Cochin  China  said  of  these  fowls,  when  subsequently  seen  by  them,  that 
they  astonished  those  people  quite  as  much  as  the  sight  had  exercised  Eng- 
lishmen." Still  these  were  the  first  known  "  Cochin  Chinas,"  —  of  which,  as 
I  have  stated,  I  imported  the  first  of  their  progeny  into  Massachusetts. 

The  Cochins  of  to-day  are  heavily  feathered  upon  the  legs,  as  we  all  know. 
I  received  from  China,  fifteen  or  twenty  years  ago,  three  or  four  different  lots 
of  variously-colored  fowls,  most  of  which  were  thus  feathered  to  the  toes. 
In  the  case  of  my  Cochins,  I  called  them  "  B-oyal  Cochin  Chinas,"  to  dis- 
tinguish them  from  the  others, —  which  I  denominated  White,  Buff,  Brown,  or 
Gray  Shanghaes,  because  the  latter  (with  the  exception  of  one  lot  I  imported 
from  Canton)  all  came  direct  from  Shanghae. 

In  course  of  time  other  parties  imported  fowls  from  England  or  China ;  and 
the  poultry  societies  in  Great  Britain  decided  upon  calling  the  Chinese  fowls 
"  Cochins."  The  American  associations  followed  this  lead  ;  the  "  standards 
of  excellence"  discarded  the  name  of  Shanghae  altogether  from  their  lists; 
and,  adopting  Dr.  Bennett's  name  for  the  Grays,  and  the  English  style  for 
the  other  colors,  we  now  have  only  the  "  Cochins  "  and  "  Brahmas"  for  this 
Chinese  stock,  which  is  quite  as  well,  since  everybody  agrees  to  it. 


50  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

The  original  "  Cochin  Chinas  "  imported  into  England,  and  first  bred  in 
this  country  in  my  yards,  were  quite  unlike  the  present  fowls  bearing  this 
name,  as  I  have  briefly  stated.  The  modern  "  Cochin  "  is  a  far  better  bird 
in  all  respects.  At  that  early  day,  however  (near  thirty  years  since),  the 
first  comers  were  deemed  very  extraordinary  fowls ;  and  I  sent  samples  of 
these  chickens  all  over  this  country,  for  years  afterwards.  They  have  quite 
run  out  now.  I  have  not  seen  a  smooth-legged  "  Eoyal  Cochin  "  for  many 
a  day,  though  for  a  long  period  they  were  popular. 

This  first  importation  of  "  Cochins  "  thus  came  from  Shanghae.  As  the 
original  illustration  indicates,  they  were  long-necked,  unfeathered-legged, 
big-tailed,  long-shanked,  rangy-formed,  ill-favored  specimens,  but  of  "mon- 
strous proportions  "  as  compared  with  any  fowls  previously  seen  in  England. 
They  laid  huge  buff-colored  eggs,  and  a  great  many  of  them.  The  cocks 
crowed  sonorously  in  "  unearthly  tones  ;  "  the  hens  were  quiet,  indolent,  and 
dumpy;  and  royalty  was  the  first  possessor  of  these  outlandish-looking 
birds,  which  the  English  public  naturally  considered  a  big  thing  in  its  way. 

And  so  it  was.  This  consignment  created  a  wondrous  furore  among  the 
lovers  of  poultry ;  and  the  royal  "  Cochin  Chinas  "  were  the  town  talk  for 
months  after  their  arrival  upon  British  soil.  Other  Chinese  samples  followed 
this  importation.  Three  or  four  merchants  received  clutches  of  these  fowls 
from  China  subsequently,  and  these  all  came  with  heavily-feathered  legs. 
The  form  of  these  latter  birds  was  of  a  more  compact  description.  They 
came  shorter  in  the  leg,  heavier  in  the  breast,  thicker  in  the  thigh,  squarer 
in  body,  broader-backed,  and  shorter-tailed,  while  the  general  (yellow  or 
brownish)  color  was  similar.  The  commoners  sensibly  called  their  fowls 
"Shanghaes"  for  a  time.  And  then  arose  the  discussion  in  England  about 
the  proper  name  by  which  they  should  be  distinguished.  Some  called  them 
"  Cochins  "  (or  Cochin  Chinas)  :  others  adhered  to  the  more  appropriate  and 
natural  title,  —  since  they  came  from  that  port, ; —  "  Shanghaes."  Thus  a 
contest  occurred  in  the  newspapers  about  the  proper  title  for  these  birds,  too, 
which  eventuated,  after  years  of  talk  and  argument,  pro  and  con,  in  agreeing 
upon  "  Cochin"  for  the  Chinese  birds  of  all  colors,  as  we  have  it  established 
to-day. 

Referring  to  the  early  poultry  work  of  Dr.  J.  C.  Bennett,  published  in 
March,  1850  (written  in  1849),  I  extract  from  pages  45,  46,  47,  the  annexed 


*  SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  51 

description  of  my  "  Koyal  Cochins/'  the  first  imported  into  America,  which 
were  bred  in  Ireland  from  the  Queen's  original  stock,  — of  which  Dr.  Bennett 
publishes  an  original  full-page  picture  from  life,  which  he  thus  alludes  to :  — 

"  It  is  with  peculiar  satisfaction  that  I  am  able  to  adorn  this  book  with 
the  beautiful  original  portraits  which  are  here  presented,  of  G.  P.  Burnham's 
importation  of  Cochin  Chinas.  They  are  drawn  from  life  by  Mr.  Durivage, 
and  are  engraved  by  Mr.  Marsh,  —  artists  of  acknowledged  ability  and  accu- 
racy. This  representation  of  Mr.  Burnham's  fowls  is  believed  to  be  the  only 
correct  delineation  of  this  species  (then)  extant,  and  I  natter  myself  will 
henceforth  be  deemed  the  standard  of  comparison.  Mr.  Burnham's  importa- 
tions are  the  best  of  any  of  the  Cochin  China  race  that  have  been  brought  to 
this  country.  They  are  from  Mr.  Nolan's  (of  Dublin)  stock,  and  took  the 
premium  at  a  late  fair  in  England,  while  standing  at  the  side  of  Her 
Majesty's  original  imported  fowls." 

This  importation  consisted  of  six  fowls,  two  cocks  and  four  pullets.  They 
were  raised  by  J.  Joseph  Nolan  of  Dublin,  to  whom  the  lord-lieutenant  of 
Ireland  sent,  to  breed,  the  original  pair  presented  to  that  dignitary  by  Her 
Majesty.  Out  of  that  stock  (the  Queen's  birds),  my  Cochins  came  direct  to 
me,  into  Massachusetts,  in  1849  ;  and  the  following  description  of  these  birds 
appears  in  Dr.  Bennett's  work  :  — 

"  The  cocks  are  very  promising  in  size.  The  color  of  one  is  brown  and  red, 
the  other  red  and  black.  The  plumage  is  beautiful,  both  in  the  roosters  and 
the  pullets.  The  color  of  three  of  the  latter  is  generally  a  yellowish  brown" 
(what  we  should  nowadays  call  partridge-colored)  "with  black-tipped  or 
marked  feathering;  the  fourth  pullet  is  of  a  deeper  brown.  The  legs  are 
free  from  feathers,  except  a  slight  show  on  the  cocks,  and  vary  in  color  from 
a  reddish  yellow  to  dark  brown.  The  form  of  the  pullets  is  unlike  any  fowls 
I  have  ever  seen  ;  though  there  is  some  general  resemblance  to  the  pure 
Dorking.  They  stand  higher  in  the  leg,  however.  The  bodies  are  symmet- 
rical, but  long.  The  tail  is  also  longer  than  that  of  the  Shanghae,  and  is 
very  thin  and  tapering  from  the  rump  outwards.  The  head  of  these  fowls 
is  quite  small,  the  combs  very  small,  and  there  are  but  slight  signs  of  wat- 
tles, as  yet,  on  the  pullets.  The  neck  is  long  and  serpent-like,  the  eye  ex- 
tremely large  and  brilliant,  the  chest  is  full,  and  the  breadth  of  back  is  very 
great.  The  frames  of  these  fowls  are  ample,  and  the  plumage  lays  closely  to 
the  body.  They  weighed,  on  the  average,  at  starting  from  Ireland,  about 
eight   pounds  each,  the  cocks  about  nine  pounds.  ...  A  reference  to  the 


52  .  TEE  CHINA  FOWL. 

original  picture  in 'The  Illustrated  London  News' shows  a  Strong  n  sem- 
blance; indeed,  the  figure  in  the  foreground  is  a  fair  portrait  of  Mr.  I»urn- 
ham's  birds,"  &0. 


717///  this  fowl  was  called  "Cochin  China"  at  the  outset,  no  one  has  ever 
yet  explained.  It  is  beyond  question  the  fact  that  no  such  birds  were  ever 
produced  in  ihat  southern  province  of  the  Chinese  empire,  which  State,  by 
referenoe  to  our  map  again,  the  reader  will  perceive  is  located  hundreds  of 
miles  below  the  ports  where  our  ships  trade.  And  it  is  positively  known  that 
no  such  large  fowls  have  ever  been  known  there,  as  the  inhabitants  of  Cochin 

China  territory  voluntarily  avouch.     When  the  real  Shanghae  fowls  were  first 

seen  by  these  people,  they  exclaimed  at  their  monstrous  proportions;   and,  as 

Mr.  Robert  Fortune  stated  in  L853,  "they  were  as  greatly  astonished  at 
sight  o(  these   enormous   birds,   as   were   the  British,  when    they   met.   with 

them." 

We  have  yet  to  learn  that  there  existed  between  the  northern  and  south- 
ern extremities  of  the  Chinese  const,  prior  to  the  opening  of  the  ports  there 

to  foreign  trade,  any  Commercial  communications  that  would  warrant  the 
supposition  that  the  large  Shanghai  fowls  would  be  likely  to  be  transported 

thenoe  to  Cochin  China.  It  is  proved,  on  the  contrary,  by  abundant  declara- 
tions on  the  part  of  the  few  English  travellers  and  naturalists  who  have  vis- 
ited  both    portions  o(  the   empire,   that    this   stalwart    representative    o(  the 

gallus  giganteus  at  any  rate  is  nof  indigenous  to  Cochin  China.  This  fowl 
is  not  known  at  all  in  that  part  of  China.  And  Mr.  Fortune,  who  has  resided 
in  and  travelled  extensively  over  the  interior,  at  both  extremes  oi'  the  coast 
borders,  declares  emphatically  that  this  class  of  domestic  bird  is  not  only 
unknown  there,  but,  that,  the  fowls  o\'  Cochin  China  territory  are  by  no  means 
of  a  marked  character  in  any  respect. 

We  conclude,  therefore,  that  this  misnomer  for  the  Queen's  fowls  was 
invented,  as  was  the  casein  the  instance  of  "Brahma"  for  another  mis- 
called variety, —  the  former  being  coined  by  some  British  sailor,  who  was 
ambitious  to  get  up  a  little  sensational  nonsense  in  the  way  o(  a  mime  for 
these  foreign  birds,  such  as  would  be  more  high-sounding  and  grandiloquent, 

perhaps,  in  his  estimation,  than  the  common-sense  appellation  they  should 
have  been  called  by  from  the  beginning,  to  wit,  plain  Shanghaes, 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  DRAUMA.  53 

It  surely  will  not  be  argued  by  any  sensible  person,  that  the  English  ambas- 
sador, whose  official  headquarters  wore  at  Canton,  Shanghae,  or  Pekin,  in  the 
north,  would  be  likely  to  go  down  to  Cochin  China,  ten  or  twelve  hundred 
miles  south,  to  procure  the  birds,  when  these  fowls  were  to  be  had  at  Shanghae 
(which  has  been  proved  to  be  their  homo  in  a  hundred  instances  since  then) 
so  readily.  And,  moreover,  is  the  fact  clearly  established  that  Her  Majesty's 
fowls  came  not  from  Coohin  China,  when  we  remember  (as  in  the  "  Brahma- 
pootra "  case)  that  no  shipment  from  that  same  Cochin  China  country  to 
England  or  America  has  ever  since  been  heard  of;  while  we  have  ample 
authority  for  the  fact  that  "  no  such  large  fowls  were  ever  known  in  that 
region  by  the  natives  of  Cochin  China." 

Still  Messrs.  Bull  are  a  stubborn  race,  and  in  their  likes  and  dislikes  they 
adhere  to  habit  with  wonderful  tenacity.  Her  Majesty's  fowls  were  originally 
dubbed  "  Cochin  Chinas  ;  "  and,  had  they  subsequently  been  proved  to  have 
come  from  Norway,  her  faithful  subjects  would  have  insisted  upon  calling 
them  Cochin  China,  at  any  hazard.  As  in  the  case  of  the  "Brahmapoo- 
tras,"  they  shortened  that  title  to  " Brahmas"  however,  so,  in  the  other  in- 
stance, they  dropped  the  second  syllables  of  the  original  name,  and  estab- 
lished "  Cochin"  for  the  Chinese  varieties.  There  is  no  objection  to  either 
name,  now  :  both  are  expressive  and  sufficiently  brief.  But  we  have  never 
yet  been  able  to  determine  why  the  name  of  the  fowls  whose  rightful  cogno- 
men we  aro  now  considering  should  have  become  established  in  this  style; 
since  it  is  beyond  doubt,  that  these  birds  never  saw  the  country  of  Cochin 
China  (as  Mr.  Fortune  avers),  any  more  than  did  the  splendid  Gray  Shang- 
haes  ever  revel  upon  the  banks  of  the  Brahmapootra. 

The  reader  is  here  requested  to  turn  over  to  page  55,  to  examine  the  fine 
illustration  there  given  of  u  Buff  China  Fowls."  This  drawing  is  furnished 
us  by  Jos.  M.  Wade,  Esq.,  of  Philadelphia,  among  others,  and  admirably 
represents  a  fine  pair  of  adult  birds  of  the  now  called  "Buff  Cochins  "  of 
modern  days.  These  fowls  were  drawn  from  life  by  J.  W.  Ludlow  of  Bir- 
mingham, Eng.,  from  a  trio  of  "  Buff  Cochins "  selected  by  Mr.  Wade 
of  the  Oak  Lane  Poultry  Yards,  during  a  late  trip  to  England  for  that  pur- 
pose, the  artist  and  breoder  agreeing  that  they  were  the  finest  trio  of 
"  Cochins  "  they  had  seen :  the  cock  being  the  same  that  was  used  for  the 
English  "  Illustrated  Book  of  Poultry,"  by  Lewis  Wright.  The  original 
stock,  whence  these  birds  come,  had  its  birth  in  Shanghae. 


54  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

The  Shanghae  fowls  of  all  the  different  colors,  from  white  to  black,  as  we 
have  described  them  in  a  previous  portion  of  this  work,  are  now  called  "  Co- 
chins" therefore.  The  English  nor  the  American  standards  set  down 
among  their  "  recognized  breeds  "  any  of  these  "  old-fashioned  titles."  We 
all  go  for  improvements  nowadays;  and  it  is  just  as  well  to  fall  in  with  the 
large  majority  who  have  established  these  names,  and  which  the  present 
generation  of  poultry-breeders  and  fanciers  have  come  to  be  accustomed  to. 
Yet  it  is  also  as  well  that  the  younger  portion  of  our  fraternity  inform  them- 
selves as  to  the  original  title  of  this  now  Americanized  and  Englishized 
nomenclature  for  fowls,  and  learn  where  the  old  stock  first  came  from  ;  since 
it  is  not  impossible,  sooner  or  later,  that  some  of  our  younger  fanciers  in 
America  may  chance  to  find  themselves  in  China,  hereafter,  —  upon  a  pleasure- 
trip,  perhaps,  which  may  be  extended  even  to  the  limits  of  Cochin  China 
proper ;  and  those  who  may  read  these  lines  may  then  remember  our  asser- 
tions, and  profit  by  the  hints  contained  in  this  little  volume,  upon  this 
subject. 

The  Cochin  is  minutely  described  by  a  leading  authority,  in  terms  precisely 
like  those  used  to  designate  the  original  "  Shanghae  "  fowl  we  have  already 
noticed  at  length.  He  must  have  a  stout  beak,  round  head,  fine  quality  of 
upright  single  comb.  The  eye  should  be  red  and  full,  for  beauty  and  for  use  : 
it  gives  a  nice,  brisk  look  to  a  sufficiently  quiet  bird,  harmonizes  better  with 
the  general  color,  denotes  more  constitution,  and  is  less  liable  to  disease.  The 
neck  not  too  long  ;  the  body  long,  deep,  and  broad  ;  the  shank  and  tail  short. 
The  true  carriage  of  the  body,  both  in  the  cock  and  hen,  should  be  upright 
forward,  with  the  hinder  parts  comparatively  raised.  A  great  depth  from  the 
base  of  the  neck  above,  to  the  point  of  the  breast-bone  with  its  weight  of 
flesh,  tends  to  produce  this  form,  and  to  show  to  advantage  the  fluff  and 
feathers  peculiar  to  this  fowl.  The  leagth  of  the  breast-bone  is  to  be  desired 
and  looked  to.  With  this  form  all  will  appreciate  the  neat  head,  full  neck, 
and  broadness  of  the  back,  continued  from  across  the  wings  to  the  tail ;  and 
that  redundant  supply  of  feathers  immediately  before  the  tail,  that  gives  the 
broad,  square  look  that  distinguishes  the  high-caste  birds,  and  which  makes 
their  tails  apparently  so  short.  The  small,  compact  wing  will  accompany 
these  qualities,  and  with  that  a  peculiar  bunch  of  feathers.  On  the  back, 
before  the  tail,  will  be  found  a  profusion  of  feathers,  and  that  fluffiness  about 


BUFF  CHINA  COCK  AND  HEN.    Imported  hy  Jos.  M.  Wade,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 


SHANGHAE,  COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  57 

the  thighs,  and  about  and  under  the  tail  and  the  hinder  lower  portions  of  the 
body,  that  forms,  with  the  feathered  legs,  one  of  the  chief  characteristics  of  the 
race.  Too  much  importance  cannot  be  attached  to  straight,  well-boned, 
shortish  shanks ;  and,  if  you  want  appearance,  weight,  and  constitution,  they 
must  be  wide  apart. 

In  neither  cock  nor  hen  do  we  like  to  see  the  tail  sticking  straight  up,  but 
forming  a  nice,  agreeable  line  with  the  back,  or  slightly  elevated ;  and  termi- 
nating in  nice,  soft,  but  somewhat  longer  and  drooping  feathers  in  the  cock ; 
the  whole  in  the  hen,  from  the  feathers  around  it,  wearing  a  much  shorter  ap- 
pearance. A  tinge  of  red  on  the  back  of  yellow  legs,  stout  and  short,  suits 
us  best.  In  forming  a  standard  for  them,  we  ought  to  insist  on  those  points 
that  are  peculiarly  theirs,  and  to  discountenance  those  that  in  any  way 
imply  the  possibility  of  an  admixture  with  another  breed. 

They  are  the  most  domestic,  amiable,  quiet,  and  peaceable  of  all  the  varie- 
ties of  poultry.  They  are  exceeded  by  none  in  their  attachment  to  their  own 
houses  or  yards,  from  which  they  never  wander  far,  even  when  their  liberty 
is  unrestricted ;  and  in  quietness  they  are  unequalled.  They  are  good  layers, 
and  careful  sitters  and  mothers  ;  and,  what  is  very  important,  the  chickens 
are  hardy,  easy  to  raise,  and  less  liable  to  be  aifected  by  disease  than  those 
of  many  other  breeds.  In  short,  as  layers  they  are  unequalled  ;  laying  when 
quite  young,  and  in  the  coldest  days  of  winter,  as  well  as  the  finest  days  of 
spring. 

This  breed,  it  is  supposed,  have  been  propagated  by  the  Chinese  for  a 
special  purpose,  and  are  the  result  of  long  and  persevering  eiforts  on  their 
part,  in  the  same  way  and  by  the  same  means  that  choice  breeds  of  cattle 
have  been  obtained  with  a  particular  end  in  view,  —  some  for  taking  on  pre- 
cocious fat,  others  for  milk,  &c.  The  object  the  Chinese  had  in  view  in 
rearing  this  description  of  fowl,  was  for  caponizing.  His  mammoth  height 
and  lank  proportions  are  just  what  are  required  for  making  a  capon  weighing, 
when  fifteen  or  sixteen  months  old,  a  dozen  pounds  or  over.  Yet,  so  far  as 
we  are  generally  informed,  the  instances  where  such  care  in  multiplying 
fowls  in  China  is  practised,  are  but  few,  since  the  majority  of  the  natives 
raise  immense  numbers  of  chickens,  only ;  and  do  not  look  so  interestedly 
after  especial  excellence  in  any  particular  strain  or  variety  of  poultry,  when 
they  can  so  much  more  easily  produce  thousands  of  the  medium  qualities, 
which  answer  their  purpose,  ordinarily. 


58 


THE  CHINA  FOWL. 


The  latest  variety  of  the  now  so-called  Cochins  is  "  a  grand  little  fowl " 
recently  minutely  described  by  Henry  Beldon,  a  noted  English  breeder.  This 
is  known  as  the  Cochin  Bantam.  The  originals  of  this  small  breed  are  said 
to  have  been  taken  from  the  garden  of  the  imperial  summer-palace  at  Pekin, 
when  that  royal  establishment  was  sacked  in  the  late  Chinese  rebellion. 
Here,  again  (though  we  have  little  faith  in  this  story  by  itself),  we  observe 
the  positive  characteristic  of  the  Briton,  when  once  his  mind  is  fixed  upon 
an  idea,  —  in  the  persistence  exhibited  to  prolong  this  "  Cochin  "  misno- 
mer for  a  Chinese  bird  avowedly  admitted  to  have  come  from  the  imperial 
garden  at  Pekin,  distant  many  hundred  miles  north  of  the  province  of  Co- 
chin China.  Our  own  opinion  is,  that  these  birds  are  akin  to  the  old-style 
Chinese  Bantams  we  have  had  in  America  many  years. 


COCK  AND  HEN  OF   THE  "  COCHIN  BANTAM  "  VARIETY. 


This  diminutive  bird  was  first  brought  to  public  notice  in  England,  as  late 
as  at  the  Crystal  Palace  poultry-exhibition  of  1862.  They  were  shown  by  Mr. 
Kerrich  of  Dorking,  who  has  retained  and  bred  them  in  their  purity,  con- 
stantly ;  who,  it  is  said,  rears  them  with  great  success,  which  is  accounted 
for  by  the  fact  that  the  County  of  Surrey  is  warmer  than  other  English  dis- 
tricts, according  to  this  authority. 

Mr.  Beldon  says  of  these  "  Cochin  Bantams/'  that,  "  as  they  spring  from 
a  single  pair,  it  is  no  wonder  that  the  chicks  are  difficult  to  rear.  Of  course 
I  am  aware  that  by  crossing  with  other  breeds  a  stronger  bird  is  produced ; 


SHANGHAE,  COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  59 

but  the  breed  by  crossing  loses  much  of  its  beauty,  the  produce  having  longer 
shanks  and  tail,  and  often  spotted  hackles.  In  fact,  they  are  not  to  be  com- 
pared to  the  true  breed.  The  real  Pekin  is  a  first-class  Cochin  China  in 
miniature.  I  have  had  them  of  such  excellence  that  no  large  Cochin  could 
excel  them ;  and,  what  is  somewhat  remarkable,  the  chickens  from  the  pure 
breed  are  always  good,  and  they  breed  as  true  as  sparrows.  .The  chicks  are  diffi- 
cult to  rear,  and  are  a  bird  of  the  sunshine ;  and,  when  chicks,  require  to  be 
fed  often.  Hard-boiled  eggs,  chopped  up  with  bread-crumbs,  I  haye  found 
answer  well  in  the  earlier  stages  of  their  life,  then  mixed  up  with  oatmeal, 
and  so  on  to  oatmeal  made  up  into  a  stiff  paste,  and  oatmeal  and  thirds,  and 
then,  with  a  little  grain  mixed  in;  in  fact,  they  require  to  be  pampered 
somewhat.  The  chicks  feather  very  rapidly  at  eight  to  ten  weeks  old,  being 
as  pretty  as  paint ;  it  is  well  known  that,  until  the  second  year,  when  the 
cocks  get  fully  furnished  in  their  feathering,  the  first  year  they  are  somewhat 
scanty  in  their  plumage.  This  does  not  apply  to  the  hens.  For  breeding 
purposes,  I  prefer  the  one-year-old  cocks.  I  find  they  breed  much  better  than 
the  two-year-old  birds.  The  points  of  the  breed  are  as  follows :  smallness 
in  size,  —  cocks  weigh  from  sixteen  to  eighteen  oz.,  hens  fourteen  to  sixteen 
oz. ;  shape  exactly  like  the  large  Cochin  ;  legs  sbort  and  well  feathered,  and 
may  be  either  willow  or  yellow  color,  or  even  buff  throughout ;  comb  of  course 
single,  and  as  the  large  Cochins." 

In  a  late  discussion  held  by  the  Massachusetts  Poultry  Society  in  Boston, 
veteran  breeders  of  the  Cochin  and  Brahma  varieties  held  that  it  is  quite 
time  that  a  correct  standard  in  shape,  and  appropriate  characteristics  of  the 
China  varieties  should  be  fixedly  determined  on  in  this  country,  in  order  that 
fanciers  may  know  and  realize  what  form  and  points  it  is  advisable  and  en 
regie  to  aim  to  breed  to,  nowadays.  If  the  best  type  of  the  true  original 
Shanghae  fowl,  imported  from  that  city  five  and  twenty  years  ago,  were  strictly 
adhered  to,  admirable  portraitures  of  which  bird,  in  its  genuine  truthfulness 
of  delineation,  is  given  in  this  volume  of  Mr.  T.  S.  Cooper's  stock  (on  page 
10),  and  if  these  were  taken  as  a  model,  —  in  our  own  opinion,  breeders 
could  not  fail  to  approach  perfection  rapidly  in  producing  birds  of  this  type 
of  the  now-called  "  Cochins." 

On  page  61  we  give  portraits  of  the  original  cock  and  hen  (as  illus- 
trated in  Kerr  and  Dixon)  ;  and,  on  page  62,  portraits  of  a  trio  of  six  months' 
old  Cochins  (of  the  Queen's  variety)  from  the  same  work.     These  are  like- 


60 


THE  CHINA  FOWL. 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA. 


61 


nesses  of  my  early  Cochin  China  stock,  smooth  limbed,  taken  from  the  birds 
in  my  yards  at  Roxbury,  Mass.,  in  1849 ;  from  which  illustrations  it  will  be 
seen  how  much  these  then  called  "  Cochins  "  are  like  (or  unlike)  the  so-called 


G.  P.  BURNHAM'S  ORIGINAL  "COCHIN  CHINAS"  (1849). 


62 


THE  CHINA   FOWL. 


Cochins  of  our  time.  The  figures  are  presented  for  purposes  of  comparison 
with  other  drawings  of  fowls  in  this  volume,  with  the  reminder  that  these 
delineations  represent  the  Cochin  stock  first  had  in  America,  and  otherwise 
portrayed  in  Weir's  picture  (in  1844)  of  these  smooth-legged  birds  on  page 
48,  representing  the  Queen's  Cochins. 


SIX  MONTHS'  OLD  COCKEREL  AND  PULLETS.     BURNHAM'S  EARLY  "COCHINS"   (1850). 

The  name  of  "  Cochin  "  was  afterwards  generally  adopted  in  Great  Britain 
for  all  the  different  colored  Chinese  fowls ;  and  fine  samples  were  bred  there 
of  the  Buff,  the  Cinnamon,  and  the  Partridge  especially,  which  were  sent 
out  to  this  country,  and  which  are  now  being  imported  thence  continually, 
by  American  breeders  and  fanciers,  to  replenish  and  keep  up  the  character  of 
the  "  Cochin  "  stock  now  in  this  country. 


THE  "BKAHMAS." 

It  is  my  purpose,  in  this  part  of  my  present  volume,  to  place  upon  record 
as  accurately  as  may  be,  the  actual  facts  pertaining  to  the  variety  of  fowls 
mentioned  in  the  above  caption  -%  believing  that  a  clear  statement  regarding 
this  breed  will  prove,  even  at  the  present  day,  more  or  less  interesting  to  the 
poultry-breeders  and  fanciers  of  the  United  States,  set  down  in  concise 
form,  with  data  accompanying  this  account,  to  verify  the  statements  in 
relation  to  the  true  modern  history  of  these  Chinese  fowls  imported  into 
and  bred  in  America,  originally  known  among  us  as  "  Gray  Shangbaes,"  and 
latterly  as  "  BrahmasP 

Early  in  1849  I  learned  that  a  few  Light-Gray  fowls  of  extraordinary  propor- 
tions and  remarkable  qualities  had  been  imported  from  China  into  Pennsyl- 
vania.    I  had,  previously  to  this  time,  sent  to  England  for  a  clutch  of  the 


64  TEE  CHINA  FOWL. 

Queen's  "  Cochin  China  "  fowls,  which,  as  I  have  stated,  had  been  also  greatly 
lauded  through  the  English  press ;  and  which  stock  had  been  sent  to  Her 
Majesty  by  the  British  ambassador  in  China,  upon  the  opening  of  Chinese 
ports  to  foreign  commerce  after  the  war  there. 

But  some  Gray  fowls  had  reached  Pennsylvania,  which  my  friend  Dr.  J.  J. 
Kerr  of  Philadelphia  (then  known  in  poultry  circles  by  his  nom  de  plume 
"  Asa  Rugg  ")  thus  wrote  me  about :  "  This  remarkable  variety  must,  in  my 
opinion,  stand  at  the  head  of  the  races  of  poultry,  having  the  largest  blood 
in  them  of  any  breed  of  fowls  with  which  I  am  acquainted.  They  come  here 
from  Shanghae,  China.  They  are  light  gray  or  streaked  white ;  and  at  seven 
months  old  I  have  one  pair  that  weigh  over  nineteen  pounds." 

Dr.  John  C.  Bennett's  book  contains  portraits  of  the  two  birds  mentioned, 
after  I  got  them,. which  are  drawn  from  life,  and  engraved  by  S.  E.  Brown  of 
Boston,  which  the  author  thus  describes  (in  1850),  though  this  picture  was 
taken  and  this  description  was  written  in  1849,  when  the  fowls  were  young, 
and  while  that  work  was  in  course  of  preparation.  Dr.  Bennett  says,  "  This 
breed  of  fowl  has  been  imported  into  Pennsylvania  within  the  last  two  years, 
and  ranks  at  the  head  of  the  list  in  that  region  for  all  the  good  qualities 
desirable  in  a  domestic  bird.  The  color  is  a  light  streaked  Gray,  rather  than 
otherwise;  and  the  portraits  given  below  are  those  of  fine  samples  of  this 
great  stock.     They  are  designated  '  Gray  Chittagongs.7 " 

These  were  my  first  Gray  fowls,  portraits  of  which,  from  the  original  draw-  i 
ings  (still  in  my  possession),  taken  when  the  fowls  were  quite  undeveloped  in 
form,  appear  in  this  present  book,  and  which  for  years  I  called  "  Gray  Shang- 
haes,"  although  Dr.  Bennett  called  them  at  first  "  Chittagongs,"  as  we  all  did. 

In  describing  the  Chinese  fowls,  to  which  class  of  birds  this  brief  work  is 
exclusively  devoted,  I  thus  make  mention  of  my  light  "  Gray  Shanghaes  " 
here  because  the  date  at  which  I  first  obtained  this  breed  was  during  the 
same  year  that  I  received  the  Queen's  "  Cochin  Chinas  "  from  England ;  and 
because,  moreover  (although  for  some  little  time  neither  of  these  choice 
varieties  were  greatly  appreciated),  these  "  Gray  Shanghaes,"  as  they  were 
called  by  me,  for  the  reason  that  they  came  from  Shanghae  into  Pennsylvania, 
have  turned  out  to  be  first  in  the  estimation  of  all  the  admirers  of  good  China 
stock;  and,  in  my  judgment,  to-day,  as  Dr.  Kerr  writes  me  about  the  old  pair 
in  1849,  "  they  stand  at  the  head  of  the  races  of  poultry  "  in  the  world. 


LIGHT    BRAHMA    COCK   AND   HEN.       (  Prize  Birds.    From  Photographs.) 
Owned  and  bred  by  W.  II.  Todd,  Vermillion,  Ohio. 


SHANGHAE,  COCHIN,  BRAHMA. 


67 


In  1850,  in  New  York  City,  on  board  ship  direct  from  Shanghae,  in  com- 
pany with  Wm.  T.  Porter,  Esq.,  then  editor  of  the  New- York  "Spirit  of  the 
Times  "  (who  informed  me  of  the  arrival  of  these  fowls  from  China),  I  procured 
five  lighter  colored  Gray  fowls,  nicely  marked,  and  very  even  in  pencilled 
plumage,  which  I  paid  $100  for,  and  took  to  Massachusetts ;  and  afterwards 
bred  with  the  old  pair,  and  their  first  progeny.  These  I  called  Gray  Shang- 
haes  still,  because  they  all  came  from  that  port.  And,  though  the  poultry- 
books  denominated  the  original  pair  for  one  season  "  Chittagongs,"  /  had  no 


DU1 


&$*&£* 


THE  ORIGINAL  "  GRAY  SHANGHAE  "  (DR.  KERR)   COCK,  AT  EIGHT  MONTHS  OLD. 


name  for  this  fine  variety  other  than  "  Gray  Shanghaes  "  for  several  years. 
Knowing  that  all  of  them  came  from  China,  in  vessels  from  the  then  newly- 
opened  Art  of  Shanghae,  I  could  see  no  reason  for  calling  these  birds  after 
the  name  of  a  state  or  province  in  India,  —  to  wit,  Chittagong.  And,  knowing 
also  as  I  did  afterwards,  when,  where,  and  by  whom  the  name  "  Bramapootra" 
was  created  (as  I  will  shortly  show),  I  would  not  assent  to  misnaming  so 
grand  a  fowl.  And  so,  as  I  have  said  before,  I  shortly  named  them  "  Gray 
Shanghaes,"  which  I  deemed  their   appropriate   cognomen,  since  they  all 


68  '  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

came  to  this  country  from  the  Chinese  port  of  Shanghae,  and  were  simply 
gray  in  color  —  instead  of  being  buff,  white,  partridge,  or  black. 

Fanciers  immediately  discovered,  when  I  had  my  latest  Light  Grays 
housed  at  home  in  their  roomy  quarters,  that  "they  were  too  white ;"  they 
u  were  too  indistinct  in  color ; "  they  "  were  too  light."  But  I  bred  them 
steadily  that  year,  and  very  satisfactorily.  I  sold  a  great  many  eggs,  mean- 
time. In  the  summer  and  fall  I  sent  away  several  young  chickens ;  and  in 
1851,  I  exhibited  at  the  Boston  shows  the  old  and  some  young  stock, 
though  but  little  was  said  about  them,  except  that  they  were  showy  fowls, 
and  very  large/ 

After  breeding  the  Philadelphia  birds  a  year,  I  sold  my  first  pair  of  Grays 
to  Dr.  Bennett,  who  then  had  a  fine  stock  of  sundry  varieties  at  Plymouth, 
Mass.  Here  the  doctor  first  put  forth  the  famous  original  "Plymouth 
Rocks,"  which  he  thus  described :  "  I  produced  this  fine  breed  from  a  Cochin 
China  cock  with  a  hen  crossed  between  a  Fawn-colored  Dorking,  Malay,  and 
Wild  Indian."  * 

The  clever,  talented  doctor  was  noted  for  his  enterprise  and  zeal  in  the 
poultry  business.  He  bred  a  great  many  fine  fowls,  and  was  a  personal  'friend 
of  mine  from  as  far  back  as  in  1835,  when  I  firs't  met  him  in  the  western 
country.  He  bought  my  two  first  Grays ;  and  from  them  and  a  pale  silver 
Cinnamon  or  drab  Shanghae  hen  (of  the  Forbes'  importation  from  China) 
he  produced  a  clutch  or  two  of  very  nice  Light-Gray  chickens,  some  of  which 
he  exhibited  at  the  fowl-shows  in  Boston  in  1851  and  1852,  portraits  of 
which  "  Burampootras,"  taken  from  the  birds  and  accurately  engraved  by 
Fox  in  1851,  will  be  found  on  next  page. 

These  first  Gray  chickens,  thus  produced  by  Dr.  Bennett,  had  a  small  top- 
knot or  slight  tuft  of  feathers  at  the  back  of  the  head ;  all  of  them,  as  will 
be  noticed  in  this  picture  of  them,  on  a  small  scale,  published  in  1852.  Where 
this  feature  came  from,  I  never  knew ;  but  I  had  no  such  "  disqualification  " 
upon  any  of  my  own  fowls,  first  or  last ;  and  upon  this  first  lot  of  Gi«ys  only, 
of  the  doctor's,  did  I  ever  see  this  peculiarity. 

*  This  is  not  the  "  Plymouth  Rock  "  of  the  present  day,  1870-74.  That  is  quite  a  different 
fowl,  and  altogether  better.  This  bird  is  recognized  in  the  new  American  Standard  as  a  variety, 
or  breed.  It  is  a  cross,  however,  between  the  Dominique  and  the  Black  Java,  originating  a  few 
years  since  in  Connecticut  and  Massachusetts,  and  is  an  excellent  fowl. 


SHANGHAE,  COCHIN,  BRAHMA. 


69 


Dr.  Bennett  continued  to  breed  the  Grays,  thereafter,  very  successfully.  I 
furnished  him  with  several  other  specimens  of  birds  out  of  the  progeny  of  my 
first  and  second  lots,  which  I  bred  together ;  and  he  sent  a  few  of  these  to 
England  in  1852  "  on  speculation,"  to  London. 

In  1851,  Dr.  Bennett,  Mr.  Hatch  of  Connecticut,  and  myself  all  showed 
the  Light-Gray  stock  in  small  quantities ;  and  the  doctor  had  for  some  time 
been  exercising  his  busy  brain  to  coin  "  a  good  name  "  for  these  fowls.     He 


DR.  BENNETT'S  ORIGINAL  TRIO  OF  "  BURAMPOOTRAS."     DRAWN  FROM  LIFE  IN  1851. 

consulted  jiie  regarding  this  proposition ;  and  I  always  contended  for  what  I 
considered  to  be  their  correct  cognomen,  namely,  "  Gray  Shanghae,"  for  the 
very  good  reason  already  given. 

But  this  title  was  not  sufficiently  high-sounding  to  suit  the  doctor's  views. 
And  so  I  will  here  repeat,  as  I  have  already  communicated  it  through  another 
channel,  precisely  what  occurred  regarding  this  name  for  the  splendid  Gray 


70  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

Shanghaes,  —  as  it  took  place  in  my  house.    I  quote  from  an  article  I  contrib- 
uted to  Wade's  Philadelphia  "  Fancier's  Journal,"  in  March,  1874. 

"Dr.  John  C.  Bennett  of  Plymouth,  Mass.,  in  those  days  a  shrewd  and 
enthusiastic  breeder  of  all  kinds  of  fancy  fowls,  made  me  a  fabulous  offer  for 
my  pair  of  "  Gray  Chittagongs  "  (the  Dr.  Kerr  Philadelphia  birds),  and  took 
them  away.  He  bred  them  with  a  very  light  drab  or  buff  Shanghae  hen  he 
had,  of  the  Porbes'  importation,  and  produced  a  clutch  of  fine,  showy  chickens, 
which  he  exhibited  at  the  second  or  third  Boston  fowl-show,  to  which  he  desired 
to  give  a  specific  name. 

"  In  those  long-ago  days,  a  good  name  for  fowls  was  i  a  big  thing '  towards 
success,  among  fanciers,  in  disposing  of  the  stock  they  produced.  The  doctor 
first  consulted  me  on  this  point,  and  in  my  own  library  he  took  down  an  atlas. 
Turning  to  the  Eastern  countries,  he  pored  over  China,  Cochin-China,  Hindos- 
tan,  &c,  and  his  eye  lighted  upon  the  Burrampootra  Hiver  in  India. 

"  '  Eureka  ! '  cried  the  amiable  doctor,  *  I  have  found  it !  Here  it  is,  and 
it's  a  stunner ! ' 

"  And  he  pointed  to  that  unpronounceable  word  "  Burrampootra  "  upon  the 
map. 

"  <  What  is  it  ? '  I  quietly  asked. 

" '  The  name  for  my  birds.  Do  you  see  ?  Grand,  expressive,  stylish,  capital ! ' 
he  continued. 

"  Thus  it  began.  He  shortly  varied  it  to  '  Brahmah-pootra,'  the  first  por- 
tion of  this  term  being  the  name  of  the  chief  deity  of  the  Hindoos.  But  this 
compound  was  too  lengthy.  Then  it  was  cut  short  to  Brahmah,  and  finally, 
by  universal  approval,  became  Brahma,  —  a  very  good  name  for  a  very  good 
fowl,  though  I  continued  for  years  to  call  my  stock  —  precisely  like  his,  and 
bred  originally  from  the  same  pair  of  '  Chittagongs '  with  the  lighter  birds  I 
got  on  shipboard  in  New  York  from  China  —  what  they  really  were,  to  wit, 
1  Gray  Shanghaes.' 

"This,  in  brief,  is  the  true  history  of  the  original  coining  of  the  name 
(  Brahma.'  (The  theory  set  up  by  one  writer,  that  '  the  first  pair  of  Brahmas 
were  brought  from  Luckipoor  up  the  Brahmapootra  River,  in  a  ship  to  New 
York,  by  a  sailor '  whose  name  has  never  been  given,  is  sheer  romance  and 
nonsense.)" 

9 

Now,  it  should  be  observed  just  here,  that  Dr.  Bennett's  Poultry  Book,  pub- 
lished by  Phillips  &  Sampson  of  Boston  in  1850,  '51,  makes  no  mention  what- 
ever of  the  "  Brahmapoutra  "  or  the  "  Brahma  "  fowl.  He  does  mention  the 
"  Gray  Chittagong,"  however ;  and  the  illustrations  of  this  breed  in  his  book 
(which,  be  it  remembered,  is  of  my  Philadelphia  "  Gray  Shanghaes  ")  are  the 


SHANGHAE,  COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  71 

very  fowls  he  afterwards  purchased  of  me  ;  which  he  bred  from,  and  the  pro- 
geny of  which  he  first  called  "  Burampootras,"  and  subsequently  worked  down 
into  "  Brahmas :  "  while  this  further  important  fact  must  not  be  lost  sight  ot 
just  here,  also,  that,  notwithstanding  Dr.  Bennett  published  his  excellent  Poul- 
try Book  in  1850  and  1851,  this  name  "  Brahma  "  or  "  Brahma  Poutra  "  does 
not  appear  in  its  pages  at  all,  and  no  allusion  whatever  is  made  to  this  name 
in  that  work  by  Dr.  Bennett,  or  to  Mr.  Cornish's  or  Charnberlin's  existence. 

Now,  no  one  has  ever  disputed  or  questioned  the  fact  that  Dr.  Bennett  manu- 
factured this  name.  "  Thou  canst  not  say  I  did  it !  n  all  others  can  truthful- 
ly exclaim.  Nobody  takes  any  credit  for  this  performance  originally,  save  the 
pleasant,  ingenious  doctor  himself.  Most  assuredly  the  writer  of  these  pages 
never  claimed  to  have  applied  this  cognomen  to  the  Gray  Shanghaes.  Still 
there  has  been  some  controversy  as  to  when  these  fowls  were  so  named.  I  have 
shown  that  this  title  was  in  no  shape  applied  till  after  1851. 

Tracing  this  name  with  these  birds  thus,  down  from  1849  to  1852,  the  fol- 
lowing further  corroborative  evidence  that  they  were  identical,  and  just  what 
I  have  now  described  them,  assumes  importance,  namely :  upon  page  177,  in 
Wingfield's  splendidly  illustrated  work  on  poultry,  Dr.  Wm.  Custe  Gwynne, 
in  1853,  speaking  of  the  original  Light  Brahmas  sent  out  by  us  from  America 
to  England,  says,  a  Another  circumstance  which  confirms  me  in  this  view  as  to 
the  identity  of  these  '  Brahmapootra '  birds  (Bennett's)  with  the  Shanghae 
breed,  is  the  fact  that  the  fowls  recently  presented  to  Her  Majesty  by  Mr.  G.  P. 
Burnham,  under  the  name  of  f  Gray  Shanghaes,'  are  admitted  by  Dr.  Bennett 
to  be  precisely  similar  to  his  own.  And  Mr.  Burnham  assures  me  that  the 
original  stock  from  which  the  '  Gray  Shanghaes '  presented  to  Her  Majesty 
were  bred  was  imported  direct  from  Shanghae." 

All  of  which  is  perfectly  correct,  as  I  have  herein  shown.  The  fowls  I  sent 
to  the  Queen  were  bred  from  the  first  two  Grays  received  from  Philadelphia, 
which  stock  Dr.  Kerr  informed  me  came  from  Shanghae, —  and  out  of  the  second 
lot  I  got  in  New  York,  through  Mr.  Porter,  from  on  board  a  ship  direct  from 
the  port  of  Shanghae.  No  Dark  Brahmas  had  then  been  seen,  or  alluded  to. 
Dr.  Bennett's  earliest  chickens  were  bred  out  of  that  very  first  Philadelphia 
pair  of  Grays ;  and  later  birds  were  bred  by  him  from  the  progeny  of  that 
stock,  and  other  younger  fowls  I  supplied  him  with  in  1851  and  1852,  and 
afterwards.     He  always  admitted  this.     He  had  no  occasion  to  deny  or  dis- 


72 


THE  CHINA   FOWL 


AMERICAN  DARK  BRAHMA  COCK  AND  HEN.     M  BLACK  PRINCE  M  AND  "  JOAN." 
Prise  Birds,  bred  by  Philander  Williams,  Taunton,  Mass. 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  73 

pute  it.  The  Doctor  always  gave  me  credit  for  what  was  then  exactly  true. 
We  differed  simply  in  our  opinions  as  to  what  name  this  splendid  variety 
should  be  called  by.  I  adhered  to  "Gray  Shanghae;"  and  he  coined  the 
title  of  " Burampootra,"  " Brahma-Poutra,"  and  finally  "Brahma/'  as  it  now 
stands  in  England  and  America. 

And  this  brings  me  to  further  authoritative  corroborating  evidence  upon 
this  point,  occurring  in  1852,  and  referring  directly  to  the  controversy  then 
rife  in  this  country,  about  the  naming  of  this  stock  —  up  to  this  time  all 
being  Light  Brahmas  —  to  wit :  — 

At  the  third  or  fourth  Boston  show,  in  the  fall  of  1852,  the  Committee 
of  Judges — consisting  of  Dr.  Eben  Wight,  Dr.  Bennett,  Messrs.  Andrews, 
Fussell,  and  Balch  —  reported  in  extenso,  officially,  upon  the  Chinese  varie- 
ties. From  that  Report  (of  which  Dr.  Wight  was  chairman),  I  take  the  fol- 
lowing extracts,  which  will  show  the  fanciers  of  to-day  how  near  the  exact 
truth  my  statements  are,  and  have  been  hitherto,  in  regard  to  this  naming 
of  the  "  Brahma"  fowl.  This  Report,  from  which  I  now  quote  in  detail,  was 
made  immediately  after  the  Boston  exhibition  of  the  "New-England 
Society  for  the  Improvement  of  Domestic  Poultry,"  as  follows  : — 

"  Your  Committee  would  call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that,  among  the 
numerous  fowls  exhibited  this  season,  as  upon  former  occasions  (notably  in 
1851),  a  very  unnecessary  practice  seems  to  have  obtained,  in  the  misnaming 
of  varieties.  Cross- bred  fowls  have  been  called  by  original  cognomens  un- 
known to  practical  breeders ;  and  a  host  of  birds  well  known  to  the  Committee 
have  been  denominated  by  any  other  than  their  real  conceded  ornithological 
titles.  This  leads  to  ridicule,  and  should  not  be  sanctioned  by  your  Society. 
Many  honest,  careful  breeders  may  thus  be  deceived  ;  and  this  multiplying  of 
unpronounceable  and  meaningless  names  for  domestic  fowls  is  entirely  un- 
called for.  Your  Committee  recommend  a  close  adherence,  hereafter,  to 
recognized  titles  only,  .  .  .  and  allude  to  a  case  in  point. 

"  The  largest,  and  unquestionably  one  of  the  finest  varieties  ever  shown 
among  us,  was  entered,  by  the  owner  of  this  variety  as  the  '  Chittagong.' 
Other  coops,  of  the  same  stock,  were  labelled  '  Gray  Chittagong ; '  others 
(same  stock)  were  called  'Bramah  Pootras;'  and  others,  'Gray  S^angl^es.' 

"  Your  Committee  are  divided  in  opinion  as  to  what  these  birds  ought 
rightfully  to  be  called ;  but  the  majority  of  the  Committee  have  no  idea 
that  'Bramah  Pootra'  is  their  correct  title.  .  .  .  Several  of  the  specimens 
are  positively  known  to  have  come  direct  from  Shanghae  ;  and  none  are  known 


74  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

to  have  come  originally  from  anywhere  else.  For  the  present,  however,  the 
Committee  accept  for  them  the  title  of 'Gray  Shanghae/  ' Chittagong,'  or 
'  Bramah  Pootra/  as  different  breeders  may  elect, —  admitting  that  they  are  a 
very  superior  bird,  and  believing  .  .  .  they  will  be  found  decidedly  the  most 
valuable  among  all  the  large  Chinese  breeds,  of  which  they  are  clearly  a  good 
variety." 

This  is  quoted  accurately  from  the  Report  published  in  1852,  when  several 
parties  showed  the  Light-Gray  stock,  in  competition,  under  the  different 
names  above  indicated.  But  the  Committee  of  Judges — who  saw  at  a  glance 
that  all  the  birds  were  identical  in  color,  shape,  and  characteristics  —  deemed 
it  but  just  to  comment  as  they  thus  did  upon  this  unwarrantable  diversity  of 
cognomen  for  the  same  stock. 

Now,  all  these  four  thus  severally-warned  varieties,  to  wit,  the  "Chittagongs," 
the  "  Gray  Chittagongs,"  the  "  Brahma  Pootras,"  and  the  "  Gray  Shanghaes," 
were  then  unquestionably  my  original  fowls  and  their  descendants.  There 
was  at  that  time  no  question  about  this  fact ;  and  three  of  these  very  lots  we 
all  positively  knew  were  mine,  or  out  of  my  stock.  These  "  Chittagongs,"  as 
I  have  already  stated,  were  entered  at  this  show  by  G.  W.  George  of  Hav- 
erhill, and  were  the  original  Gray  Philadelphia  (Dr.  Kerr)  pair,  then  three 
years  old.  Mr.  George  purchased  them  of  Dr.  Bennett,  to  whom,  as  I  have 
said,  I  first  sold  them.  The  "  Gray  Chittagongs,"  then  so  called,  were  con- 
tributed by  a  Mr.  Hatch,  and  were  said  to  have  been  bred  in  Connecticut. 
The  "  Brahma  Pootras  "  were  Dr.  Bennett's,  first  shown  the  year  before  as 
chickens  bred  from  my  fowls,  as  we  were  all  aware,  but  thus  so  named  by  the 
Doctor.  The  "  Gray  Shanghaes  "  were  my  contributions  (sixty-four  specimens 
in  all),  three  years  old,  two  years  old,  one  year  old,  and  chickens,  bred  from 
the  two  original  Grays,  and  my  second  imported  five  lighter  Gray  fowls  ;  — 
the  first  from  Dr.  Kerr,  the  second  through  Wm.  T.  Porter. 

And,  up  to  that  time,  no  other  such  Light-Gray  fowls  had  been  seen,  or 
were  anywhere  else  known  to  exist,  in  this  country.  These  were  identical  in 
color,  form,  beauty,  size,  and  general  characteristics ;  and  all  were  single- 
combed  birds,  as  far  as  any  of  us  observed. 

The  chairman  of  the  Committee,  from  whose  official  report  I  have  last 
quoted,  Dr.  Eben  Wight  of  Dedham,  Mass.,  was  a  gentleman  above  re- 
proach or  suspicion,  in  every  respect,  who  could  not  have  been  induced,  upon 


SHANGHAE,  COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  75 

any  consideration  whatever,  to  have  given  his  name  or  sanction  to  any  asser- 
tion that  he  did  not  know  to  be  just  and  truthful.  He  said  "  all  these  fowls 
were  identical ;  "  that  "  they  were  out  of  the  same  stock ; "  that  "  several  of 
the  specimens  were  positively  known  to  have  come  from  Shanghae,  direct ;  " 
that  "  none  of  them  were  known  to  have  come  from  anywhere  else ; "  that 
"  they  were  a  good  variety  of  the  Chinese  fowl ;"  that  "  they  were  the  largest 
and  finest  fowls  ever  shown  among  us  ;  "  and,  though  the  Committee  were  not 
then  prepared  to  accord  them  a  specific  name,  yet  "  the  majority  of  the  Com- 
mittee had  no  idea  that '  Brahma  Pootra '  was  the  rightfully  proper  title  "  for  * 
any  of  them. 

Dr.  Wight  was  one  of  the  oldest  importers  then  known  in  America,  and  a 
very  careful,  conscientious  man.  He  then  bred  no  Gray  fowls  of  any  de- 
scription. He  could  have  had  no  possible  object,  save  to  do  justice  to  all 
parties,  in  this  Report.  And  his  language  on  this  occasion  was  not  only 
forcible  and  clear,  but  it  was  truthful,  just,  and  reasonable,  as  well  as  un- 
equivocal. 

After  this  exhibition,  the  name  of  "Brahmah  Pootra"  was  adopted  by 
Dr.  Bennett,  in  spite  of  my  own  arguments,  and  the  advice  of  others  who 
were  opposed  to  this  "  multiplying  of  meaningless  names  "  for  varieties  of 
fowls  ;  and  in  this  shape  it  went  out  to  England.  In  course  of  time  it  came 
to  be  reduced  to  Brahmah ;  and  finally,  as  I  have  said,  to  Brahma.  But  the 
fowls  underwent  no  change.  In  England  also  they  came  to  be  called 
"  Brahmas ; "  and  the  very  fowls  I  sent  to  Her  Majesty,  the  receipt  of  which 
were  acknowledged  by  Hon.  Col.  Phipps,  the  Queen's  secretary,  as  "  magni- 
ficent Gray  Shanghaes,"  were  the  following  season  exhibited  by  His  Boyal 
Highness  Prince  Albert,  at  the  Birmingham  Show  (in  1853),  as  "  Brahmas." 
And  so,  after  1854,  they  came  generally  to  be  called  by  this  accepted  and 
acceptable  title,  though  not  so  by  me  for  some  years. 

In.  order  to  show  how  incorrect  is  the  statement  made  by  Mr.  Cornish  in 
1869  (see  Wright's  "  Illustrated  Book  of  Poultry,"  page  241),  that  "  the  name 
of  Brahma  was  established  in  1850  "  (!),  I  set  these  recorded  facts  down 
here ;  and  in  confirmation  of  this  I  add  that  the  first  American  "  National 
Poultry  Society  "  in  this  country  gave  two  annual  exhibitions  (in  1854,  '55) 
in  New  York,  at  Barnum's  Museum ;  the  proprietor  of  which  establishment, 
Phineas  T.  Barnum,  Esq.,  was  president  of  this  society,  "  assisted  by  forty 
managers,"  —  so  ran  the  prospectus  published  at  its  formation. 


76  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

The  first  exhibition  of  this  National  Association  occurred  in  the  winter 
of  1854,  and  proved  a  great  success.  I  was  there  with  my  Light  and  Dark 
Gray  Shanghaes,  and  other  Chinese  fowls,  and  carried  away  a  score  of  the 
leading  premiums  with  my  variously-colored  China  breeds,  old  and  young. 
A.  B.  Allen,  Esq.,  the  famous  cattle-breeder  of  Western  New- York  State,  in 
"  The  American  Agriculturist,"  thus  wrote  of  this  fine  Poultry  Show :  — 

"  This  great  show  at  Barnum's,  contrary  to  general  expectation,  brought 
out  altogether  the  finest,  largest,  and  choicest  exhibition  ever  witnessed  in 
America.  Of  their  kinds,  there  were  scarcely  a  pair  of  inferior  birds  in  this 
vast  collection;  and  many  fowls  came  five  hundred  miles  for  this  occasion. 
This  very  fact  showed  that  poultry  fanciers  within  striking  distance  of  New 
York  had  confidence  in  the  Society,  in  its  managers"  (I  was  one  of  the 
forty),  "  in  the  ability  of  Mr.  Barnum  to  carry  it  out,  and  in  his  integrity,  &c. 

"  As  an  evidence  of  the  interest  then  felt  among  fanciers  of  all  ranks  and 
all  fortunes,  they  sent  their  birds,  attended  themselves,  and  took  a  lively 
interest  in  every  thing  that  appertained  to  the  proceedings.  We  saw  there 
highly  distinguished  scientific  gentlemen,  lawyers,  statesmen  of  great  repute, 
grave  divines  '  wise  with  the  lore  of  centuries/  merchants,  commercial  men 
called  by  way  of  eminence  '  millionaires,'  artisans,  farmers,  gentlemen,  —  sin- 
gly, or  with  their  wives  and  daughters  and  little  children,  all  eagerly  threading 
their  way  through  and  by  each  other,  to  gaze  at  the  coops  and  cages,  intent 
on  seeing  every  thing,  examining  a  great  many  birds,  and  not  once  only,  but 
repeatedly,  day  after  day,  during  the  show,  did  we  see  some  of  the  same  indi- 
viduals, groups,  and  families. 

"Now,  this  means  something.  People  would  not  congregate  at  this  inclem- 
ent season,  from  fifty  to  five  hundred  miles  distant,  to  witness  a  '  chicken 
show '  in  New  York,  unless  there  was  '  something  in  it.'  There  is  something 
in  it.  There  is  a  study  in  it.  It  is  a  delightful  contemplation  in  natural 
history.  These  beautiful  birds  are  a  thing  to  love,  to  interest  young  minds, 
and  old  ones  too.  They  are  among  the  things  to  make  country  life  inter- 
esting, to  attach  people  to  home,  and  make  it  pleasanter  than  all  the  world 
beside,"  &c. 

Thus  wrote  Mr.  A.  B.  Allen  in  1854,  about  the  "National  Association  "  and 
its  first  show  of  fowls  at  New  York.  And,  even  at  that  period,  it  was 
charged  that  "  G.  P.  Burnham  of  Gray  Shanghae  notoriety  was  stoutly  con- 
tending against  the  establishment  of  the  name  l  Brahma  Pootra'  for  the 
popular  Light-Gray  fowls  being  so  largely  bred  in  America,"  which  name  had 
not  even  then  been  adopted,  not  to  say  "  established,"  by  us  ! 


SHANGEAE,  COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  77 

A  full-page  cut  (see  page  78)  gives  us  a  drawing  of  a  mature  cock  and  hen 
of  the  "  Chamberlin  stock,"  so  called,  as  bred  by  Mr.  Emory  Carpenter  and 
others  in  Connecticut.  The  bodies,  plumage,  and  general  outline  of  this  pair 
are  good  representations  of  modern  Light  Brahmas.  The  color  is  shown  as 
being  considerably  darker  than  the  average  birds  of  the  light  variety,  nowa- 
days^ yet  it  is  very  nearly  the  tint  of  feathering  that  characterized  my  best 
early  Gray  Shanghaes.  This  pair  are  too  short  in  the  leg  for  good  breeding 
stock ;  but,  as  we  had  the  pleasure  of  examining  Mr.  Carpenter's  fine  fowls 
at  Hartford,  recently,  we  can  vouch  for  the  fact  that  his  Brahmas  are  not 
thus  deficient.  We  have  rarely  seen  better-fashioned  broods  of  this  race  than 
the  samples  we  were  shown  upon  Mr.  Carpenter's  spacious  premises,  this 
season,  the  generous  size  of  which  is  especially  notable. 

The  admirable  drawings,  by  Ludlow,  of  W.  H.  Todd's  beautiful  Light  and 
Dark  Brahmas  (see  plates  on  pages  65  and  81)  give  us  a  truthful  idea  of  the 
general  character  and  appearance  of  those  two  well-bred  American  varieties, 
up  to  standard,  in  points.  This  cock  and  hen  in  each  picture  are  from  pho- 
tographs of  the  winning  fowls  portrayed  ;  and  Mr.  Todd  is  well  known  as  a 
leading  successful  Western  breeder  (at  Vermillion,  0.),  who  has  turned  out, 
in  the  past  few  years,  some  of  the  finest  samples  of  both  Light  and  Dark 
Brahmas  that  have  ever  been  produced  in  this  country. 

In  all  the  varieties  of  Chinese  fowls  which  Mr.  Todd  has  placed  in  his 
breeding-runs,  this  gentleman  has  procured  the  best  stock  that  money  could 
purchase  ;  and  his  good  taste  and  large  experience  have  enabled  him  to  make 
the  choicest  selections  attainable,  both  in  this  country  and  in  England. 

The  illustration,  page  72,  of  Philander  Williams's  American-bred  Dark 
Brahmas  (younger  birds,  not  fully  developed  in  proportions  when  pictured) 
also  shows  a  fine  pair  of  these  symmetrical  and  favorite  fowls. 

The  English  Dark  Brahma  cock,  figured  on  page  S6,  is  described  in  the 
London  "  Poultry  Review  "  as  a  bird  of  great  ra'rity.  It  is  stated  that  "ten 
of  his  brother  and  sister  chicks  carried  off  cups  in  1872,  at  the  British  shows, 
this  cock  being  the  flower  of  the  flock."  Mr.  Lingwood  refused  250  guineas 
($1,250)  for  him  and  his  five  brothers,  and  50  guineas  ($250)  for  himself, 
alone.  Choice  Brahma  fowls  must  be  "taking  their  place  in  the  front,"  in 
England,  indeed.  Yet  such  a  bird  as  this  is  for  a  "  Dark  Brahma  "  —  with 
his  monumental  tail  and  fearful  "  hock  "  —  could  never  win  among  first-class 
American  competitors,  assuredly. 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  79 

Although — as  I  look  at  the  question  of  the  origin  of  the  Brahma  fowl  — 
any  new  theory  that  may  be  promulgated  in  1874  can  possess  no  material 
weight,  and  can  have  no  effect  upon  what  was  so  clearly  written,  discussed, 
and  published  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago,  in  all  its  confirmatory  partic- 
ulars, yet  I  cannot  pass  by  without  notice  the  account  of  Mr:  C.  C.  Plaisted, 
published  in  June,  1874,  in  "  The  Poultry  World ; "  because  Mr.  Plaisted  in  his 
"history"  states  much  that  is  true,  and  all  that  he  himself  Sieves,  undoubt- 
edly, but  at  the  same  time  some  points  which  are  clearly  incorrect.  And  here 
I  insert  an  article  from  a  Kensington  (Penn.)  correspondent  of  Wade's  "  Fan- 
cier's Journal"  of  a  late  date,  which  will  explain  itself;  with  the  single  re- 
mark that  Kensington  (a  part  of  Philadelphia)  was  the  former  residence  of 
Dr.  J.  J.  Kerr,  of  whom  in  1849  I  obtained  my  first  pair  of  Gray  Shanghaes, 
and  who  sent  Dr.  Bennett  also,  in  1850,  a  trio  of  these  birds,  that  Doctor 
Kerr  thought  "  quite  equal  to  Mr.  Burnham's,"  &c. 

"  Kensington,  June  8,  1874. 

"Mr.  Editor,  —  I  noticed  in  a  poultry  magazine,  lately,  by  a  Mr.  Plaisted, 
in  a  long  story  he  tells  about  the  origin  of  Brahma-Pootra  fowls,  the  state- 
ment, that  '  G.  P.  Burnham,  Esq.,  of  Melrose,  Mass.,  claims  that  he  had  the 
first  in  New  England ; '  that  '  a  ship  came  to  New  York  at  just  the  right  time 
for  him  to  secure  a  new  importation  of  these  Gray  Shanghaes,'  as  he  calls 
them,  Ho  add  to  his  already  choice  stock  that  were  never  seen  until  after  the 
exhibition  of  1851 '  in  Boston. 

"This  writer  claims  that  he  attempts  nothing  only  to  state  facts,  just  as 
they  existed.  But,  as  he  was  formerly  a  partner  in  the  chicken-trade  with 
Dr.  John  C.  Bennett,  of  famous  '  Burrampootra '  notoriety,  it  is  a  little  strange 
that  he  doesn't  (?)  know  that  said  Dr.  Bennett  published  his  well-known 
'  Poultry  Book'  in  1850,  with  appendix  (second  edition)  in  1851,  in  which  Mr. 
Burnham's  splendid  first  Gray  Shanghaes  (there  called  Chittagongs  by  the 
doctor)  are  both  fully  described  and  illustrated  as  i  most  remarkable  for  size 
and  beauty.'  And,  in  appendix,  the  doctor  adds,  'We  have  just  received 
from  Dr.  Kerr,  Philadelphia  (the  same  party  Burnham  got  his  first  ones 
from),  some  of  these  imperial  birds ; '  and  Dr.  Kerr  writes,  c They  are  quite 
equal  to  Mr.  Burnham's.'  .  .  .  '  This  is  enough,'  adds  Dr.  Bennett,  '  to  have 
said  more  would  have  been  a  work  of  supererogation.' 

"This  in  1850,  '51,  by  Dr.  Bennett  himself — this  man  Plaisted's  business 
partner,  who  writes,  in  the  same  article  I  quote  from,  that  he  (Plaisted)  got 
a  lot  of  somebody  else's  Gray  stock  in  1851,  which  were  the  Simon  Pure  ;  but 
in  reference  to  which  fowls  not  a  syllable  is  printed  in  Dr.  Bennett's  '  Poultry 
Book,'  issued  that  year,  and  which  stock  nobody  then  knew  any  thing  about ! 


80  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

"I  think  it  must  be  the  other  stock  that  Mr.  Plaisted  says  'were  never 
seen  till  after  the  1851  exhibition/  For  how  could  Burnham's  fine  Gray 
fowls  have  been  thus  pictured  and  so  elaborately  described  in  Dr.  Bennett's 
work  in  1850  and  '51,  unless  they  had  been  seen  previously?  as  they  had 
been,  and  admired  by  thousands,  '  the  wonder  of  all  poultry-fanciers  who  be- 
hold them,'  as  Dr.  Bennett  puts  it  (see  his  book).  Or,  if  the  Plaisted  fowls 
were  then  known,  why  didn't  Bennett  know  and  say  something  about  them 
in  his  very  comprehensive  '  Poultry  Book '  issued  at  that  time  ?  " 

The  query  embodied  in  the  above-quoted  article  is  pertinent;  but  the  advo- 
cates of  the  Cornish-Brahma  origin  theory  are  all  similarly  at  fault  in  their  dates. 
Now,  in  reference  to  "  some  of  the  earliest  Light  Brahmas,"  which  Wright 
says,  "  Mr.  Burnham  sent  to  Her  Majesty  in  1852,"  I  have  simply  to  state 
that  the  cage  of  fowls  I  sent  to  the  Queen  was  duly  labelled,  in  large  printed 
capitals,  "Eight  Gray  Shanghaes."  I  wrote  a  brief  note  to  His  Royal 
Highness,  Prince  Albert,  in  1852,  for  Her  Majesty,  — which  Hon.  Mr.  Inger- 
soll  (then  American  Minister  to  the  Court  of  St.  James)  kindly  forwarded, — 
in  which  "  I  respectfully  tendered  to  Her  Majesty  a  cage  of  Gray  Shanghae 
fowls,  bred  from  my  stock  imported  into  America  from  China,  three  years 
since ; "  and  the  Queen,  through  the  Hon.  Mr.  Secretary  Phipps,  "  acknowl- 
edged and  accepted  this  magnificent  present  of  Gray  Shanghaes,"  and  subse- 
quently sent  me  her  portrait,  a  photographed  copy  of  which  adorns  this 
volume  (see  frontispiece),    v 

Mr.  Wright  continuously  evinces  a  lamentable  ignorance  of  the  real  char- 
acteristics of  what  is  now  known  as  the  Brahma  fowl.  We  have  it  upon  very 
recent  English  authority,  in  two  instances  (from  reliable  persons  of  his  own 
neighborhood,  who  know  him  individually),  that  "American  poultry-men 
appear  to  be  Wright-mad,  in  quoting  his  opinions,"  &c. ;  that  "  this  man 
never  had  anything  but  English  Dark  Brahmas,  and,  in  breeding,  he  has 
accomplished  absolutely  nothing  with  them,  even,  as  compared  with  Horace 
Lingwood,  Mr.  Boyle,  Mr.  Teebay,  and  many  others." 

Again,  in  his  last  work,  1872,  '73,  Wright  says,  "the  pea-comb  is  the  ori- 
ginal American  type ; "  which  statement  is  known  by  everybody  to  be  a  gross 
error ;  for,  as  all  of  us  are  aware,  the  Light  Gray  fowls  were  bred  here  three 
or  four  years,  at  least,  before  this  peculiarity  was  discovered  or  spoken  of  at 
all.  "Still,"  he  adds  in  the  same  paragraph,  "there  were,  till  very  lately, 
some  splendid  yards  of  single-comb  Light  Brahmas  in  England,  which  would 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA. 


81 


run  English  competitors  closely  "  for  the  premiums  offered  at  the  shows  there. 
Himself  thus  admitting  that,  until  a  recent  date,  even,  there  were  not  a  few 
"splendid  yards"  of  the  single-comb  variety  of  Light  Brahmas  to  be  seen 
in  Wright's  own  neighborhood,  —  London. 


DARK  BRAHMA  COCK  AND  HEN,  BRED  BY  C.  H.  KENEGY,  POLO,  ILL. 


Mr.  C.  C.  Plaisted  of  Hartford,  Conn.,  who  is  now  an  earnest  advocate  of 
pea-comb  birds  only,  —  and  who  asserts  with  great  assurance  that  the  strain 
of  Chamberlin-Bennett  Light  Brahmas  he  breeds  will  throw  the  triple  comb 


82  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

almost  invariably,  —  thus  expresses  himself  in  Sept.  1874,  in  a  poultry 
monthly,  upon  this  Brahma  comb  question.  He  says,  "  More  than  three- 
fourths  of  the  Brahmas  which  I  bred,  to  1861,  had  the  pea-comb ;  since  that 
time  I  have  had  but  one  single-combed  bird.  I  do  not  claim  that  single 
combs  and  smooth  legs  are  marks  of  impurity  in  this  breed ;  but  it  is  certain 
that  breeders  of  them  are  behind  the  times,  now.  I  am  by  no  means  the  only 
breeder  in  the  country  who  has  come  to  look  upon  the  pea-comb  as  a  settled 
thing  with  the  Brahmas ;  but  to  obtain  it  on  all,  in  perfection,  is  something 
not  yet  accomplished,  for  this  triple  comb  takes  many  forms." 

Another  English  writer,  as  late  as  in  1866,  affirms,  that,  "  of  the  Light 
Brahmas  imported  from  America,  and  carefully  bred  in  his  hands,  fully  half 
of  his  chickens  showed  the  single  comb ;  and  especially,"  he  adds,  "  is  this 
formation  observable  in  the  cocks  raised  in  my  runs." 

An  American  fancier  in  Massachusetts,  who  has  produced  some  of  the  finest 
specimens  reared  in  New  England  in  the  past  twelve  years,  frankly  states  in 
a  leading  poultry  journal,  in  1867,  that  he  "has  found  the  single  comb  crop- 
ping out  on  one-fourth  of  the  best  Brahma  fowls  —  otherwise  well  pointed  — 
bred  in  his  experience."  It  is  most  certainly  the  fact  that  all  breeders  of  the 
Light  variety,  from  whatever  "  strain  "  it  may  come,  have  bred  and  continue 
to  breed,  to-day,  more  or  less  single  combs.  Mr.  Plaisted  is  correct,  however, 
that  breeders  of  single-combed  birds,  alone,  would  be  "behind  the  times." 
And  a  smooth-limbed  Brahma  would  indeed  be  highly  objectionable  !  But 
the  single  and  pea-comb  were  both  a  characteristic  of  the  original  stock,  and 
this  result  is  inevitable  —  at  least  at  present. 

With  the  Dark  Brahmas,  this  "  deviation  "  in  the  comb  formation  has  not 
been  frequent.  Most  of  this  variety  come  with  the  pea-comb  well  developed  ; 
and  the  single  comb  with  these  is  decidedly  the  exception,  not  the  rule ;  as 
has  been  the  case  from  the  outset. 

Mr.  Wright  stoutly  contends,  that  the  pea-comb  only  is  the  true  indication 
of  "  genuine  blood,"  however.  And,  notwithstanding  this  theorist's  mixed 
opinions,  in  other  respects  regarding  the  prominent  points  in  the  Brahma 
fowl,  and  his  vehement  partiality  for  the  pea-comb  only  as  an  "  indispensable 
proof  of  purity  "  in  the  strain,  he  acknowledges  in  his  latest  work,  that, 
up  to  quite  recently  (see  his  new  "  Illustrated  Book  of  Poultry  "),  he  knew 
"  several  fine  yards  of  sm^Ze-combed  Light  Brahmas  in  England  that  would 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN;   BRAHMA.  83 

run  some  of  the  present  exhibitors  a  close  race  for  our  prizes."  Again,  in  his 
"  Brahma  Fowl "  book,  he  says  (p.  62),  "  the  originals  had  both  single  and 
pea  combs/'  while  Dr.  Bennett  says,  "  the  single  comb  is  the  usual  form." 

Inasmuch  as  the  pea-comb  on  Brahmas  is  a  very  desirable  thing  to  attain, 
this  feature  has  become  imperative,  fo?  competition  in  the  show-pens ;  and 
every  fancier  strives  to  breed  as  large  a  proportion  of  pea-comb  specimens  as 
is  possible  in  his  flocks,  in  accordance  with  Standard  requirements  in  this 
regard,  at  the  present  time. 

I  never  knew  this  point  to  be  publicly  discussed  until  after  1853.  In  that 
year,  I  find  in  the  B-ev.  W.  Wingfield's  elegant  "  London  Poultry  Book" 
the  following  paragraphs,  which  I  quote  from  that  standard  work,  pages  175 
to  178,  On  this  "  pea-comb  question."  (I  will  say  just  here  that  Mr.  Plaisted, 
in  the  June  "  Poultry  World,"  says  that  "  all  the  Light  Brahmas  shipped 
by  Dr.  Bennett  and  himself  to  England  were  bred  by  them  or  Mr.  Hatch," 
&c,  from  the  Cornish-Chamberlin  fowls,  "except  the  pair  sent  to  Dr. 
Gwynne  by  Dr.  Bennett  himself"  in  1852.)  Dr.  Gwynne  says,  in  the  work 
I  now  quote  from,  "  I  obtained  from  Dr.  Bennett  of  the  United  States  five  pairs 
of  these  birds :  three  of  these  ten  fowls,  only,  had  small  compressed  or  pea 
combs,  —  a  feature  strikingly  characteristic  of  the  Malay  fowl."  ...  "In 
none  of  the  other  seven  birds  was  this  peculiarity  found ;  nor  could  I  recog- 
nize in  them  any  thing,  either  in  points  or  conformation,  but  what  would  be 
found  in  Shanghae  birds  of  the  same  age."  Be  it  observed  here,  that  Dr. 
Gwynne's  fowls  were  from  Dr.  Bennett  of  the  United  States  —  five  pairs  (not 
one  pair,  as  Mr.  Plaisted  has  it);  that  Dr.  Bennett  bred,  with  Mr.  Plaisted, 
Hatch,  Smith,  and  others,  only  "  Nelson  H.  Chamberlin-Cornish  fowls  ;  "  and 
that  out  of  ten  fowls  of  this  strain  so  sent  to  Dr.  William  Custe  Gwynne  in 
England,  in  1852,  only  three  then  showed  this  pea-comb. 

Further  on  in  this  same  Mr.  Wingfield's  volume,  I  find  the  following  state- 
ment of  Dr.  Gwynne,  to  whom  I  never  sold  a  bird  of  my  stock,  but  who 
received  in  England,  and  bred,  only  the  Cornish,  Chamberlin,  Bennett  and 
Plaisted  strain,  which  Messrs.  Eelch,  and  other  good  "  old  breeders"  of  Light 
Brahmas  in  Massachusetts  to-day  claim  are  genuine,  because  they  breed  this 
coveted  "  pea-comb."  In  further  reference  to  which,  Dr.  Gwynne  writes,  in 
1852,  '53,  thus  (see  Eev.  Mr.  Wingfield's  work,  pp.  176,  177):  — 

"  The  single  comb  would  appear  to  be  the  usual  form  of  that  feature  in 


84  THE  CHINA   FOWL. 

the  Brahmapootra  fowls;  though,  as  Dr.  Bennett  admits,  the  true  breed 
do  sometimes  present  these  deviations."  .  .  .  "In  response  to  which," 
replies  Dr.  Gwynne,  "  I  can  only  say,  that,  out  of  twenty  chickens  bred  by 
the  birds  I  reserved  for  myself  (obtained  of  Dr.  Bennett),  I  cannot  detect  a 
single  instance  of  this  '  deviation '  from  the  single  combs  of  the  parents  ;" 
which  parents  Dr.  Gwynne  and  Dr.  Bennett  then,  and  Mr.  Plaisted  lately, 
all  affirm  were  sent  to  England,  from  the  latter  two  gentlemen,  to  Dr.  Gwynne, 
out  of  the  Cornish-Chamberlin-Connecticut  stock,  in  1852,  '53,  "  which  should 
show  only  the  '  pea-comb,'  if  they  be  pure  bred." 

"But,"  adds  Dr.  Gwynne,  on  same  page,  "another  circumstance  which 
confirms  me  in  my  view  as  to  the  identity  of  these  birds  with  the  Shanghaes 
is  the  fact  that  the  fowls  recently  presented  to  Her  Majesty  the  Queen  by 
Mr.  Burnham,  under  the  name  of  '  Gray  Shanghaes,'  are  admitted  by  Dr. 
Bennett"  (who  sent  him  this  Cornish-Chamberlin  stock)  "to  be  precisely 
similar  to  his  own;"  while  "Mr.  Burnham  assures  me  that  the  original  stock 
from  which  the  '  Gray  Shanghaes '  he  presented  to  Her  Majesty  were  bred 
was  imported  direct  from  Shanghae,"  China,  not  India.  And  my  fowls 
sent  to  the  Queen  in  1852, 1  am  quite  confident,  showed  only  the  single  comb ; 
though,  among  the  pullets,  the  pea-comb  might  have  existed,  at  that  early 
day,  without  my  observing  it ;  since  this  question  had  at  that  time  been  but 
very  little  discussed,  or  this  peculiar  comb-formation  noticed,  among  us  in 
America. 

Two  fowls,  sent  to  Mrs.  Hozier  Williams  about  this  time,  by  Dr.  Bennett, 
had  the  pea-comb,  I  think;  when  Dr.  Bennett  immediately  wrote  that, 
"  though  the  usual  form  of  that  feature  was  single,  the  true  breed  of  Brahma- 
pootras  do  sometimes  present  this  deviation"  of  the  triple  or  pea-comb. 
Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  all  our  stock  in  the  early  years  showed  both  styles 
of  comb,  the  single  comb  then  predominating  largely  in  my  birds,  as  well  as 
in  the  claimed  Cornish-Chamberlin  strain  alike,  though  Bennett  declares,  in 
1852,  that  "  the  single  comb  is  the  usual  form  of  this  feature  in  the  Brahma- 
pootra fowl,"  and  that  "the  true  bird"  (whatever  that  was  or  is)  "do 
sometimes  only  present  the  deviation"  of  the  pea-comb;  which  authoritative 
statement,  in  1853,  by  Dr.  Bennett  (Mr.  Plaisted's  partner),  simply  goes  to 
confirm  the  notable  fact  that  at  that  period  no  one  among  the  Cornish-Cham- 
berlin pure  Brahma  breeders  knew  much  about  this  "little  joker,"  the 
pea-comb. 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  85 

Mr.  Teebay  says,  in  Tegetmeier's  choice  "Poultry  Book,"  in  1867,  "The 
head  of  the  Brahmas  should  be  surmounted  with  a  triple  comb,  known  as 
the  pea-comb."  .  .  .  "But  when  first  introduced  into  England,  many  of  the 
Brahmas  had  single  combs.  At  present,  those  with  the  pea-combs  are  held 
in  higher  estimation."  The  editor  of  "  The  Poultry  Yard,"  Miss  Watts,  says, 
"The  only  difficult  point  is  the  variety  of  comb  in  the  Brahmapootras,  viz., 
the  pea-comb  and  the  single.  While  we  give  the  preference  to  the  former, 
we  do  not  see  why  both  may  not  be  pure,  as  in  the  Dorkings  "  (which  show 
the  rose  and  the  single  upright  comb,  constantly). 

Other  writers  agree  upon  the  point  that  single  and  pea-comb  birds  among 
any  "original"  strain  of  Brahmas,  or  Gray  Shanghaes,  have  both  from  the 
outset  been,  and  are  now,  bred  more  or  less  in  every  man's  yard  in  this 
country  and  in  England.  But  the  pea-comb  variety  is  the  most  desirable, 
as  I  have  said,  the  only  one  now  admissible  in  the  show-room,  under  Stand- 
ard rules,  in  competition  for  prizes,  and  this  is  being  nowadays  far  more 
generally  bred  than  the  single-comb  birds. 

But,  for  any  sensible  fancier  who  has  really  had  a  goodly  experience 
with  these  Gray  fowls,  to  assume,  in  the  light  of  to-day,  that  he  breeds  or 
meets  with  in  his  breeding  only  " pea-comb  birds "  from  either  Burnhanrs 
or  Chamberlin's  or  Hatch's  or  Bennett's  or  anybody  else's  stock,  is  entirely 
unwarranted  by  all  experience  or  previous  facts  in  this  case ;  and  such  asser- 
tions cannot  be  entertained  for  a  moment  by  any  one  who  "knows  the  ropes " 
in  this  Brahmapootra-Shanghae  business,  from  the  start,  as  I  do. 

The  pea-comb  is  the  preferable  one.  The  single-comb  birds  are  and  should 
be  discarded.  But  when,  from  any  strain,  only  the  pea-combs  are  produced, 
uniformly  and  unexceptionally,  and  I  can  be  convinced  of  this  fact,  I  want  a 
dozen  fowls  of  that  established,  perfect,  never-deviating  breed  of  Brahmas  or 
Gray  Shanghaes,  upon  my  premises  ;  for  which  I  will  gladly  pay  their  owner, 
for  the  transfer  of  said  stock  to  my  yards,  ten  times  the  sum  that  any  pur- 
chaser in  America  will  pay  for  them  ;  since,  though  I  have  had  no  difficulty  in 
preserving  the  color  of  my  stock,  in  its  shades  of  light  and  dark  (never  once 
having  bred  from  my  Gray  Shanghaes  a  buff  fowl,  as  some  old  Brahma 
breeders  say  they  have  from  their  strains),  I  have  not  been  so  fortunate,  in 
my  five-and-twenty  years'  experience  with  this  race,  as  to  be  able  to  avoid 
breeding  both  the  single  and  the  pea-combs,  in  my  flocks  ;  and  this,  too,  from 
the  very  beginning  down  to  the  year  1874.     While,  at  this  time,  I  venture 


86 


THE  CHINA  FOWL. 


HORACE  LINGTVVOOD'S  ENGLISH  PUIZE  "  DARK  BRAHMA  "  COCK,  BRED  IN  1872. 


SHANGEAE,   COCHIN,   BRAHMA.  87 

further  to  predict,  that  the  day  is  not  far  distant,  when,  upon  other  colored 
Shanghae  varieties,  or  "Cochins"  as  we  all  now  call  them,  this  pea-comb 
will  be  bred  universally,  in  preference  to  the  single  combs ;  as  I  know,  just 
now,  it  is  being  successfully  established  by  one  American  breeder,  in  perfec- 
tion, in  Massachusetts,*  upon  the  splendid  "  Partridge  Cochins  ;  "  and  this 
adornment  for  the  head  of  both  varieties  of  the  Brahmas,  it  needs  not  to  be 
repeated,  is  the  only  style  of  comb  that  fanciers  should  breed,  to  be  in  the 
fashion.     Single-comb  Brahmas  have  no  value  nowadays  for  the  shows. 

In  all  the  public  discussions,  the  Cornish-Chamberlin-Bennett  theory  advo- 
cates avoid  alluding  to  the  superb  Dark  variety  of  "Brahmas"  which  I  first 
sent  out  to  Europe,  in  1853.  None  of  these  men  refer  to  this  splendid  strain, 
which  at  once  surprised  and  interested  English  breeders  as  intensely  as  had 
the  beautiful  early  Light  birds  I  sent  to  the  Queen,  &c.  My  Dark  Grays  were 
as  fine  as  the  Light,  and  were  originally  produced  after  an  experimentally- 
studied  union  of  my  two  imported  Gray  Shanghae  strains,  and  have  thousands 
of  ardent  admirers  to-day;  though  efforts  have  been  made  in  England  to  im- 
prove upon  the  originals,  in  the  specimens  latterly  sent  back  from  Great  Britain, 
in  the  shape  of  fowls  they  there  call  "  Dark  Brahmas,"  but  which  so  very 
frequently  show  the  vulture  hock,  and  are  tainted  in  color  with  brown  or  buff 
feathering,  instead  of  carrying  the  unrivalled  pure  steel-gray  plumage  that 
alone  characterized  my  original  birds ;  which  defects  plainly  exhibit  the  Eng- 
lish crossing  with  the  Buff  or  Partridge  Cochin,  or  with  both,  as  well  as  with 
that  far  more  objectionable  nuisance  introduced  on  the  other  side  of  the  water, 
and  which  can  never  be  bred  off  of  their  birds,  — to  wit,  the  unsightly  " hock" 
upon  the  thighs,  as  is  seen  upon  the  cock,  opposite. 

A  somewhat  extensive  Light  Brahma  breeder  in  Massachusetts,  who  con- 
tends that  only  the  pea-comb  shows  itself  upon  his  breeding  stock,  which  he 
traces  back  to  the  "  pure  Chamberlin  "  strain,  has  recently  written  a  lengthy 
treatise  for  a  public  journal,  about  breeding  a  "hocked"  cock  to  Light  pul- 
lets, for  some  purpose  or  other.  Now,  this  "vulture  hock  "  is  an  English  in- 
vention, altogether.  It  has  been  known  in  this  country  but  a  few  years;  and 
upon  the  original  Gray  birds  it  was  not  seen  till  long  after  we  had  sent  our 
birds  across  the  Atlantic.     Neither  in  the  Dark  nor  the  Light  Brahmas  was 

*  Full-page  illustrations  of  this  choice  new  variety  are  given  in  this  work.  See  pp. 
133  and  143. 


88  THE   CHINA   FOWL. 

it  ever  discovered  till  the  British  fanciers  had  tried  their  experiments  with 
the  early  stock,  to  "improve"  what  a  Yankee  fancier  had  first  so  nearly 
perfected,  at  the  start.  But  this  crossing  in  with  hocked  birds  was  one  of 
their  attempts  to  increase  the  leg-feathering  in  England. 

Never  upon  my  stock,  bred  by  itself,  was  seen  the  falcon  hock,  —  this  vil- 
lanous  excrescence,  first  experimented  with  by  English  breeders,  to  add  to  the 
feathering  on  the  shanks  and  "  middle  toes."  Upon  the  modern  English 
Dark  Brahmas  this  offensive  appendage  is  now  of  the  commonest  occurrence. 
It  is  in  this  blood,  only;  and  I  have  seen  no  yards  of  the  English  Dark 
variety  latterly  among  us  that  are  not  generously  dotted  with  this  blemish  in 
the  flocks.  The  lauded  prize  cock,  figured  upon  page  86,  belonging  to  Mr. 
Lingwood,  a  recent  champion-bird  in  England  of  this  class,  it  will  be  ob- 
served, shows  a  monstrous  hock ;  and  yet  he  is  considered  one  of  the  finest 
"Dark  Brahma"  cocks  in  Great  Britain,  and  won  first  and  cup  at  the  lead- 
ing shows  there,  in  two  past  seasons,  against  all  comers.  But  this  "  hock- 
feathering,"  in  either  color,  surely  never  cropped  out  upon  my  birds,  if  purely 
bred,  either  in  England  or  America,  as  every  fancier  will  bear  me  witness. 

Thus  much  for  my  original-imported  and  American-bred  Brahmas.  To  go 
back  a  little,  in  justice  to  other  parties,  having  now  stated  my  own  case  as  I 
conceive,  fairly,  and  just  as  it  existed  from  1848,  '49  to  1852,  '53,  '54,  I  give 
place  to  the  following  account,  which  was  first  published  from  Mr.  Virgil 
Cornish  of  Connecticut  at  a  later  period ;  though  the  letter  I  am  about  to  quote 
was  dated  March  2,  1852,  and  ran  as  follows  :  — 

"  No  doubt  you  are  acquainted  with  the  relative  position  of  the  State  in 
India  called  Chittagong,  and  the  River  Brahmapootra.  Chittagong  is  on 
the  eastern  border,  bounding  west  on  the  Bay  of  Bengal.  The  Brahma- 
pootra River  empties  into  that  bay.  If  the  Brahmapootra  fowls  came  from 
that  region,  of  which  I  think  there  is  no  doubt,  still  I  am  unable  to  say  by 
which  name  they  should  be  called  with  certainty."  .  .  .  "  In  regard  to  the 
history  of  these  fowls,"  continues  Mr.  Cornish  in  this  same  letter,  "very 
little  is  known.  A  mechanic  by  the  name  of  Chamberlin  (in  Hartford, 
Conn.,)  first  brought  them  here.  Mr.  Chamberlin  was  acquainted  with  a 
sailor,  who  informed  him  that  there  were  three  pairs  of  large  imported  fowls 
in  New  York."  (When  this  occurred,  is  not  stated.)  "But  this  sailor 
dwelt  so  much  upon  the  size  of  these  fowls,  that  Mr.  Chamberlin  furnished 
him  with  money,  and  directed  him  to  go  to  New  York  and  purchase  a  pair 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  '  89 

of  them  for  him ;  which  he  did,  at  a  great  expense."  (Of  whom  this  sailor 
bought  this  stray  pair  of  Grays,  is  not  known.)  But  "  the  sailor  reported  that 
he  found  one  pair  of  gray  ones,  which  he  purchased."  {Where,  nobody  has 
ever  stated.)  "  The  second  pair  was  dark-colored,  and  the  third  pair  was 
red,"  continues  Mr.  Cornish.  "  The  man  in  New  York,  whose  name  I  have 
not  got,  gave  no  account  of  their  origin,  except  that  they  had  been  brought 
by  some  sailors  in  the  India  ships.  The  parties  through  whom  the  fowls 
came,  as  far  back  as  I  have  been  able  to  trace  them,  are  all  obscure  men." 
This  was  Mr.  Cornish's  first  frank  statement. 

Thus  far,  not  much  has  been  made  out,  as  is  evident,  by  Mr.  Cornish  in 
this  account ;  though  he  unreservedly  states  that  "  very  little  is  known  to 
him  of  their  origin,"  any  way.  Most  certainly,  there  is  no  evidence  here 
that  this  pair  of  gray  fowls,  which  Mr.  Chamberlin  gave  a  sailor  money  in 
Hartford  to  go  to  New  York  to  buy,  were  "  imported "  birds  at  all.  Mr. 
Cornish  simply  claims  that  Mr.  Chamberlin  says  he  "  sent  a  sailor  with  money 
to  New  York,"  and  "this  sailor  reported  that  he  found  a  pair  of  light-gray 
fowls  (somewhere),  which  he  purchased."  But,  as  he  probably  did  not  go  to 
New  York;  and,  as  neither  this  sailor,  Mr.  Chamberlin,  nor  Mr.  Cornish  then 
informs  us  of  whom  these  fowls  were  obtained ;  where  the  sailor  found  them  ; 
when  they  came  into  New  York ;  whether  they  were  old  or  young  birds ; 
what  the  name  of  the  ship  (or  "ships")  was;  who  "the  sailors  that  brought 
them  in  the  India  ships  "  were;  who  "  the  man  in  New  York,  that  could  give 
no  account  of  their  origin,"  was;  nor  yet  one  word  about  the  identity  of  "  the 
parties  through  whose  hands  the  fowls  came,"  except  that  "all  are  obscure 
men,"  —  this  extraordinarily  indefinite  account  is  indeed  suspicious  !  This  is 
Mr.  Cornish's  simple  tale,  however,  at  that  time ;  and  he  is  entitled  to  the 
full  benefit  of  his  statement,  which  some  one  thus  repeated  to  him. 

Further  on,  this  same  letter  from  Mr.  Cornish  says,  "  I  obtained  my  stock 
from  the  original  pair  brought  here  by  Mr.  Chainberlin."  Not  from  Mr. 
Chamberlin,  but  "from  the  stock  brought  here  by  Mr.  C."  Now,  it  is  clearly 
stated  previously  in  this  letter,  that  "  a  sailor  brought  these  fowls  to  Hart- 
ford." Mr.  Chamberlin  "  sent  a  sailor  to  New  York,  who  reported  he  had 
found  a  pair,  which  he  purchased."  However,  Mr.  Cornish  thus  proceeds  : 
"  These  fowls  were  named  *  Chittagong '  by  Mr.  Chamberlin,  on  account  of 
their  resemblance,  in  some  degree,  to  the  fowls  then  in  the  country  called  by 


90  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

that  name.  The  description  of  these  fowls  exactly  corresponds  with  that 
given  by  travellers  and  sea-captains,"  (who  ?  and  when  ?)  "  of  the  large 
light-colored  fowls  found  in  the  valley  of  the  Brahmapootra,  &c,"  concludes 
Mr.  Cornish,  in  his  letter. 

The  stock  shown  by  Mr.  Hatch  at  the  Boston  exhibition  in  1852  (and  I 
think  in  1851  also),  spoken  of  by  Dr.  Eben  Wight  in  the  Committee's  Eeport 
I  have  lately  quoted  from,  —  then  called  "  Gray  Chittagongs," —  were  said  to 
have  been  bred  from  this  Chamberlin  or  Cornish  stock,  which  came  to  Con- 
necticut in  1849,  via  a  sailor,  via  a  mechanic,  via  New  York,  via  Hartford, 
"in  the  India  ships,"  via  the  hands  of  "  all  obscure  men."  And  so  we  never 
knew,  and  can  certainly  now  never  know,  any  thing  further  about  this  "  pair 
of  Light  Grays."  Yet  such  is  the  sailor's  and  Mr.  Cornish's  account  in 
1852,  which  Mr.  Plaisted  in  1874  pronounces  a  falsity,  in  toto. 

I  have  no  more  doubt  to-day  than  I  ever  had,  that  these  two  fowls  were 
chickens  out  of  my  yards  in  1850  or  1851,  or  that  they  were  hatched  by  New 
York  or  Connecticut  parties  out  of  eggs  sent  there  from  my  original  Light- 
Gray  Shanghae  fowls,  than  I  have  that  I  am  living  now  to  write  this  para- 
graph. Nobody  knows  and  never  did  know  any  thing  to  the  contrary,  as  to 
this  strain  of  stock,  except  that  "  a  sailor  reported  to  Mr.  Chamberlin  "  (who 
sent  him  to  New  York  after  big  fowls),  that  "he  found  a  pair  of  light  gray 
ones,  which  he  purchased  "  of  a  man  in  New  York,  whose  name  Mr.  Cham- 
berlin never  got,  and  "  who  gave  no  account  of  their  origin,  except  that  they 
had  been  brought  there  by  some  sailors,"  &c,  which  statement  is  not  a  little 
mixed  and  doubtful,  upon  its  face,  to  say  the  least  of  it. 

No  time  is  fixed  upon  as  to  when  these  birds  were  thus  "  reported  "  to  have 
been  "found  by  a  sailor,"  in  Mr.  Chamberlin's  employ.  Now,  what  became 
of  Chamberlin's  stock?  Mr.  Cornish  says,  "I  procured  my  stock  from  the 
original  pair,"  &c.  Mr.  Chamberlin  called  them  "  Chittagongs."  Mr.  Cor- 
nish sold  his  fowls  (or  some  of  them)  to  Mr.  Hatch,  who  exhibited  them  as 
"Gray  Chittagongs."  Why?  Because,  when  they  were  placed  in  the  show- 
room in  Boston,  alongside  of.  my  original  Grays  (then  in  G.  W.  George's 
hands),  they  so  closely  resembled  the  Chittagongs  (as  Mr.  Cornish  says), 
that  Hatch  considered  this  their  proper  name.  Nobody  then  saw  any  differ- 
ence between  these  fowls,  and  mine,  and  George's,  and  Dr.  Bennett's.  But 
each  of  us  had  different  titles  for  our  birds,  which  the  Committee  of  Judges 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  91 

complained  of,  as  I  have  shown ;  and  Dr.  Bennett  was  himself  one  of  that 
Committee,  who  then  contended  so  ardently  for  the  "  Brahmapootra  "  title, 
but  who  was  for  the  time  being  voted  down  in  committee,  three  to  one. 

Mr.  Plaisted  (Dr.  Bennett's  former  partner),  writing  of  the  Brahmas  in 
1874,  says  that  "Mr.  Hatch  entered  his  Chamberlin  fowls  at  Boston  as 
f  Chittagongs.'  Dr.  Bennett  then  announced  these  as  '  Brahmapootras.' 
He  bought  of  and  paid  Hatch  for  his  lot,  and  placed  the  prize  cards  on  the 
coops,  with  the  new  name  and  the  names  of  the  owners,  among  which  was 
Dr.  Bennett's.  This  transaction  displeased  Mr.  Hatch  exceedingly;  and 
this  was  his  first  and  last  connection  with  the  New-England  Society."  Mr. 
Hatch  preferred  the  name  "  Chittagong  "  to  Bennett's  proposed  new  title,  and 
left  the  show-room  in  high  dudgeon,  because  the  Doctor  had  thus  nicknamed 
what  he  called  his  "  Chittagongs" 

"  Mr.  Hatch  had  more  of  this  stock  at  home,"  continues  Mr.  Plaisted, 
"  which  by  spring  he  was  able  to  sell  at  round  prices.  He  bred  them  in 
1852  and  1853,  and  his  experience  with  them  ended  about  that  time.  He  bred 
those  with  pea-combs,  and  he  considered  them  preferable  to  the  single-combed 
for  this  frosty  climate,"  —  which  last-mentioned  fact  proves  again  that  there 
were  a  good  many  "single  combs"  around  in  those  days,  among  the  "pure 
pea-comb  Cornish-Chamberlin-Hatch-Bennett-Plaisted  '  Brahmapootras.' " 

How  long  Mr.  Chamberlin  bred  the  old  pair  of  Grays,  which  are  thus 
"  reported  "  to  have  been  purchased  by  a  sailor,  from  no  one  knows  who,  no 
one  knows  where,  and  about  which  no  one  pretends  to  give  any  clue  as  to 
their  origin,  I  am  uninformed.1*  The  first  of  the  "  Brahmapootra  stock  "  I  re- 
member ever  to  have  seen,  or  heard  of,  was  that  which  I  have  now  described 
as  having  been  put  into  the  Boston  show  in  1852,  and  I  think,  also,  the  few 
young  birds  from  Bennett  in  1851 ;  though  I  can  find  no  reference  made 
to  any  other  entry  or  contribution  in  that  year.  My  impression  is  that 
there  were  a  few  shown  by  Mr.  Hatch  in  1851,  or  some  one  from  Connecti- 
cut, —  young  fowls,  — though  I  am  not  certain  about  this. 

After  the  exhibition  of  1852,  however,  the  mania  for  the  Gray  fowls  became 
rife,  and  everybody  began  to  look  about  for  good  specimens  of  the  Gray  Shang- 
haes  or  "  Brahmapootras."   This  name  was  soon  changed,  because  it  proved  too 

*  In  July,  1874,  Mr.  Plaisted  says,  "the  old  pair  were  killed  in  1851."    I  am  tempted  to  query 
why?    And  to  further  ask  why  these  old  fowls  were  never  publicly  shown ?  —  G.  P.  B. 


92  TEE  CHINA  FOWL. 

cumbrous;  and  by  the  next  year  it  had  settled  down  partially  towards  Brahmah, 
and  every  one  who  had  any  of  this  stock  —  from  my  birds,  from  Bennett's, 
from  George's,  or  from  Hatch's,  made  the  most  of  their  opportunity ;  while 
breeders  generally,  both  in  England  and  America,  agreed  upon  this  last  cog- 
nomen (dropping  the  terminal  h),  as  the  accepted  name  for  this  fowl.  I 
have  never  changed  my  opinion  that  it  is  a  misnomer,  however,  though  in 
its  brevity,  now,  it  is  a  good  title. 

The  fowl  itself  is  of  Chinese  origin.  None  of  the  American  original 
stock  (of  any  nominal  strain)  ever  saw  India,  the  Brahmapootra  River,  Luck- 
ipoor,  or  the  Bay  of  Bengal.  Nobody  in  that  region  of  country  has  ever  seen 
or  reported  this  fowl  as  being  known  there.  Notwithstanding  the  past  five 
and  twenty  years  of  excitement  in  America  and  Europe  about  these  fowls, 
when  it  has  been  freely  known  to  sailors  and  shipmasters  constantly  coming 
from  and  going  to  India,  how  valuable  would  be  any  fresh  importation  of 
such  stock,  never  but  this  once  can  it  be  said  that  "  these  Gray  fowls  came 
from  India."  No  duplicate  shipments  have  ever  been  made  from  "  Luckipoor 
up  the  Brahmapootra."  No  such  fowls  have  ever  since  been  heard  of,  seen, 
"  found,"  "  reported,"  bought,  or  possessed,  by  anyho&y,  anywhere,  in  Eng- 
land or  America,  except  this  very  stock  (and  its  progeny)  that  I  have  now 
described ;  and  all  of  which,  I  solemnly  believe,  came  from  the  pair  of  Phil- 
adelphia Gray  birds  (1849)  and  the  five  Light  Gray  fowls  I  purchased  in 
New  York,  on  board  ship  from  Shanghae,  through  Win.  T.  Porter,  Esq.,  in 
1850 ;  and  no  honest  "  evidence  "  to  the  contrary  exists. 

No  Gray  Shanghaes,  no  Gray  Chittagongs,  no  Light  Gray  Brahmas,  no  such 
Gray  fowls  of  any  description,  have  come  to  America  or  into  Great  Britain, 
from  either  Shanghae  or  India,  in  the  past  nearly  twenty-five  years !  All  the 
fowls  we  have  had,  therefore,  have  been  bred  from  these  two  original  impor- 
tations—  my  stock  —  as  I  have  clearly  demonstrated,  at  least  to  my  own 
satisfaction.  When  anybody  can  show  me  any  evidence  that  I  am  in  error 
regarding  either  of  the  strains  I  have  alluded  to,  which  are  all  the  ori- 
ginal Light  Grays  (or  Brahmas)  that  anybody  has  ever  mentioned,  to  my 
knowledge,  I  shall  be  very  glad  to  be  corrected.  Until  we  have  something 
clearer  and  more  definite  upon  this  subject  than  we  ever  have  had  thus  far, 
the  facts,  as  I  have  now  stated  them,  must  therefore  stand ;  and  my  stock 
is  fully  entitled  to  the  claim  I  have  set  up  for  its  originality,  in  this  country 
and  Great  Britain,  whether  that  stock  be  good  or  bad. 


DARK    BRAHMA    COCK   AND    HEN.        (Prize  Fowls.    From  Life.) 
Bred  and  owned  by  W.  H.  Todd,  Vermillion,  Ohio. 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  95 

In  the  face  of  these  facts,  nevertheless,  almost  a  score  of  years  afterwards, 
a  Mr.  Weld  "fires  off"  at  Virgil  Cornish  of  Connecticut  "a  whole  string  of 
interrogatories,"  says  Wright,  to  prove  that  this  "  one  pair  of  large  gray  fowls" 
(which  this  man  in  Connecticut  had  first  announced  he  received  there  in 
1849)  "came  into  New  York  in  a  ship  from  Luckipoor  in  India,  in  Septem- 
ber, 1846  ! "  For  some  reason  best  known  to  himself,  this  Mr.  M.  C.  Weld 
thus  thrust  himself  into  temporary  notoriety,  and  fancied  that  he  could 
acquire  favor  with  the  Englishman,  if  he  could  contrive  to  drag  out  of 
Cornish  some  sort  of  testimony  confirmatory  of  his  (Wright's)  silly  theory ; 
but  found,  alas  !  that  he  had  simply  been  "  hoisted  by  his  own  petard."  For 
Cornish  had  unluckily  forgotten  his  1849  story,  and  fatally  named  the  year 
1846  as  the  time  when  he  got  his  wonderful  "  Brahma  Pootras ; "  which,  he 
then  (in  1869)  states  were  so  named  in  1850  !  What  name  did  he  call 
these  birds  by  from  1846  to  1850  ?  Can  Cornish  or  Weld  or  Wright  in- 
form us  upon  this  trivial  point  ?  And  can  either  of  this  hopeful  trio,  who 
are  so  "  accurate  "  and  "  explicit "  and  "  unanswerable  "  in  their  statements 
and  conclusions,  tell  us  where  these  remarkable  birds  were  secreted,  from 
1846  or  1847  up  to  1850  and  1851,  that  nobody  knew  of,  or  had  ever  seen 
them  ?  "We  pause  for  a  reply,"  but  fear  we  shall  hardly  live  long  enough 
to  get  one  from  these  "  clearly  accurate  "  and  truth-loving  gentlemen ! 

Upon  this  plainly  doubtful  story,  when  it  was  given  to  the  public,  the  ac- 
complished editor  of  the  London  Field  commented  very  sharply,  and  showed 
how  manifestly  improbable  was  this  adroitly-concocted  narrative.  So  far  as 
Mr.  Cornish's  tale  was  concerned,  this  writer  said :  — 

"A  sailor,  whose  name  nobody  knows,  belonging  to  a  ship  whose  name  no 
one  remembers,  and  having  a  captain  also  unknown,  is  stated  to  have  '  sailed 
from  the  port  of  Luckipoor'  with  these  original  fowls.  It  is  a  pity  Mr.  Cor- 
nish did  not  also  forget  the  name  of  this  port ;  for  geographical  truth  compels 
us  to  state  that  Luckipoor  is  not  a  port  at  all !  but  a  small  inland  town  in  the 
Himalaya  Mountains,  one  hundred  miles  distant  from  the  nearest  point  of 
the  Brahmapootra  River.  Luckipoor  is  not  among  the  ports  mentioned  in 
the  '  Sailing  Directions  of  British  India;'  and,  as  far  as  we  can  learn  from 
naturalists,  and  others  acquainted  with  that  part  of  the  world,  no  such  race  of 
birds  is  to  be  found  there." 

This  emphatic  clincher,  from  such  authority  as  W.  B.  Tegetmeier,  F.Z.S., 
is  acknowledged  all  over  the  world  to  be,  might  be  accepted  ordinarily  as  a 
finality.     Mr.  Wright  shrewdly  "  dismisses  this  subject  of  Luckipoor,"  very 


96  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

summarily,  after  reading  the  above  from  the  Field  (see  Wright's  latest  work, 
p.  243),  "  with  the  simple  remark  that  it  is  scarcely  matter  for  wonder  that 
the  name  of  the  ship,  captain,  and  sailor  should  be  forgotten,"  &c.  But  I 
will  add  here,  that,  inasmuch  as  no  such  ship  ever  arrived  at  Neiv  York, 
either  in  1849  first,  or  in  1846  afterwards  (as  the  two  Cornish  letters  u  accu- 
rately state  "),  this  fact  will  better  account  for  all  this  "  forgetting,"  or  "  never 
knowing  the  names  of  either  sailor,*  ship,  captain,  or  original  owner  "  of  these 
"large  light-gray  fowls,  so  reported  to  have  been  found"  somewhere  (?)  for 
Mr.  Chamberlin. 

After  Mr.  Cornish's  two  different  statements  were  published,  and  fulsomely 
indorsed  by  Wright  as  being  "  unanswerably  accurate  "  regarding  the  true 
origin  of  this  so-called  Chamberlin  pair  of  Light  Brahmas,  I  visited  New 
York  for  the  purpose  of  learning  something  about  this  fabulous  "  India  ship," 
thus  said  to  have  arrived  there  twice,  so  mysteriously,  with  these  lauded  birds 
on  board,  from  Luckipoor. 

I  obtained  access  to  the  old  Customs'  Registers  there,  from  a  critical  exam- 
ination of  which,  though  I  previously  knew  all  about  this  Bennett  "  Brahma- 
pootra "  swindle,  I  ascertained  the  following  two  important  facts,  viz.,  that 
there  is  not  upon  the  records  of  the  foreign  inward  arrival  lists  there,  any 
mention  made  of  any  ship  or  vessel  from  "the  port  of  Luckipoor,  in  India," 
in  any  month  of  the  year  1849,  first ;  nor  is  any  such  arrival  at  New  York 
recorded  "  in  September  "  (or  in  any  other  month)  "  of  the  year  1846,"  after. 

This  finishes  the  sailor-Cornish  story  ;  which,  no  doubt,  Mr.  Cornish  and 
Mr.  Chamberlin  believed  when  it  was  first  told.  But,  as  Mr.  Tegetmeier 
truthfully  asserted,  "  there  isn't  a  particle  of  evidence  in  this  to  show  that 
these  fowls  ever  came  from  India"  Dr.  Bennett,  one  of  Wright's  claimed 
chief  witnesses,  purchased  of  me,  for  $50,  the  first  pair  of  Grays  I  ever  bred  ; 
from  which  he  bred  the  first  so-called  "  Brahmapootra  "  chickens  he  ever  ex- 
hibited (vide  official  report  of  judges  at  exhibition)  in  Boston,  Mass.  And 
the  Cornish  (Hatch)  fowls  then  shown  were  there  called  "  Chittagongs,"  as 
see  Cornish's  two  letters,  and  the  report. 

When,  in  1853,  the  Dark  Brahmas  were  also  first  sent  out  from  my  yards 
in  Melrose,  Mr.  Tegetmeier  in  his  "Poultry  Book"  justly  observes,  "Sud- 
denly a  new  variety  sprang  upon  the  scene.     These  were  the  Dark  Brahmas, 

*  In  the  fall  of  1874,  a  Connecticut  writer  says  this  sailor  "  still  lives !  " 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,   BRAHMA.  97 

which  Mr.  Burnham  of  the  United  States  sent  to  Mr.  John  Baily  of  London, 
which  were  exhibited  at  the  Birmingham  show  (1853),  among  the  extra 
stock ;  and  one  pair  of  which  were  purchased  of  him  by  Mr.  Taylor  of  Shep- 
ard's  Bush,  for  100  guineas  »  ($500)  ! 

Now,  these  Dark  Brahma  fowls  were  very  choice  birds.  And  I  sent  this 
trio  out  to  Mr.  Baily,  in  response  to  his  express  order  that  "  they  must  be 
finer  than  any  thing  I  had  yet  sent  to  England,  if  it  were  possible."  They 
were  good  ones,  very  large,  in  splendid  condition,  finely  pencilled,  and  car- 
ried off  the  first  prize  at  the  Birmingham  show  of  1853,  alongside  of  the 
splendid  Light  Grays  I  had  the  previous  year  sent  to  the  Queen.  But  all 
these  fowls  were  bred  from  the  same  stock  precisely,  at  first.  The  Dark 
and  the  Light  varieties  both  came  out  of  the  Philadelphia  Grays  and  the 
lighter  colored  Gray  birds  I  subsequently  obtained  from  Shanghae  through 
Mr.  Porter,  at  New  York.  And  just  as  soon  as  it  was  discovered  that  the 
Dark  Brahmas  were  to  become  popular,  and  the  fact  was  published  that 
,  the  first  Dark  Brahmas  sent  to  England  had  come  out  from  Mr.  Burnham 
of  Melrose,  who  had  sent  the  first  Light  ones  there,  Mr.  Cornish  of  Con- 
necticut (or  some  one  for  him)  published  in  a  New- York  paper  the  fact  that 
"  he  noticed,  in  course  of  time,  as  he  bred  his  Brahmas,  that  they  grew 
darker  in  color."  But  neither  he  nor  they  had  any  Dark  Brahmas  to  offer 
from  the  pretended  pair  "  reported  by  a  sailor  "  to  have  been  "  found  in  New 
York,"  the  "  origin  of  which  nobody  knew  any  thing  about,  except  that  the 
first  pair  had  been  brought  in  the  India  ships,  from  up  the  Brahmapootra 
River,  which  empties  into  the  Bay  of  Bengal,"  &c. ;  —  which  account  might 
have  answered  a  purpose,  had  it  been  made  public  at  any  time  prior  to  March 
2,  1852,  three  years  after  I  had  been  breeding  my  fine  Gray  fowls  and  send- 
ing their  chickens  and  eggs  all  over  this  country  and  England. 

Whether  my  account  thus  gives  the  true  origin  of  the  Brahmas  or  not, 
is  not  very  material  at  this  late  day.  I  have  now  written  it,  however,  and 
furnished  data  to  back  it ;  and  I  have  given  the  statement  made  by  Mr. 
Cornish,  in  his  early  letter,  regarding  the  Chamberlin-Hatch  fowls.  I  have 
no  doubt  that  Mr.  Cornish  —  who  is  a  very  respectable  and  veracious  gentle- 
man —  believed  what  Mr.  Chamberlin  told  him  "  the  sailor  reported "  to 
Mr.  Chamberlin,  as  having  come  "  from  the  New  York  man,  who  knew 
nothing  of  the  origin  of  the  light  Gray  fowls"  thus  "found"  there.  And 
Mr.  Chamberlin,  also,  might  have  believed  what  this  sailor  said.     The  sailor 


98  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

probably  believed  what  the  man  in  New  York  (if  there  were  any  such  man) 
said, —  to  wit,  that  he  "  knew  nothing  of  their  origin/'  &c.  And,  though  these 
New- York  parties  are  described  by  Mr.  Cornish  as  being  "  all  very  obscure 
men,"  it  may  be  that  "  the  man  in  New  York,  whose  name  he  has  not  got," 
believed  the  story  he  repeated  to  the  sailor,  about  what  the  other  sailors  told 
him  regarding  these  fowls  coming  there  "  in  the  India  ships,"  &c.  But  I 
don't.  That  is  all  the  difference  there  is,  or  ever  has  been,  between  the 
theory  of  Mr.  Cornish  and  Wright,  and  the  facts  that  I  have  herein  related. 

But  this  tale  was  utterly  without  foundation  as  to  the  Cornish-Chamberlin 
gray  fowls  having  " come  from  India"  as  this  sailor  is  said  to  have  an- 
nounced; for  no  such  arrival  of  the  ship  thus  reported  came  into  New  York 
from  India,  either  in  1849,  1846,  or  1847  !  No  light  "  Gray  Shanghae  "  and 
no  "  Brahmapoutra"  fowls  ever  came  "from  India"  to  Cornish,  Chamberlin, 
Burnham,  or  any  other  man  in  America.  The  name  "Brahmapoutra"  was 
concocted  by  Dr.  Bennett,  against  my  protest,  and  has  been  since  adopted 
by  us  all.  The  "  Gray  Shanghaes,"  or  (now)  "Brahmas,"  never  saw  India; 
but  I  chanced  to  possess  the  first  of  this  race  that  were  thus  developed. 

It  is  altogether  too  much  mixed,  —  this  theory.  And,  what  I  further  be- 
lieve, and  always  have  believed,  about  this  very  "pair  of  light  Gray  fowls" 
which  Mr.  Chamberlin  so  got,  through  his  "sailor"  agent,  who  " rejjorted 
that  he  found  them  in  New  York,"  is,  that  they  went  there  from  my  stock ; 
and  that  "the  man  in  New  York  "  sold  them  to  him  "at  a  great  expense," 
perhaps  knowing  whence  they  came  (and  perhaps  not),  but  making  the  most 
he  could  in  this  bargain,  because  they  were  "a  very  fine  pair  of  large  ones." 

What  confirms  me  the  more  in  this  belief,  is  the  notorious  fact  that  none  of 
this  splendid  stock  was  seen  anywhere  until  after  I  had  bred  my  Grays  in  Box*- 
bury  two  seasons;  and  not  until  Dr.  Bennett  produced  his  fowls  at  the  shows 
of  1851  and  1852.  Then  we  had  young  samples  of  this  so-called  Cornish- 
Chamberlin-Hatch  stock ;  but  no  old  Gray  fowls  were  even  then  shown,  except 
mine  — -  a  fact  that  cannot  be  disputed. 

Now,  if  this  stock  could  have  been  shown  to  have  existed  in  America  prior 
to  my  introduction  of  the  Grays  to  notice  in  1849,  '50,  as  the  record  exhibits  in 
my  case,  —  why  not  then  have  let  us  know  where  it  was,  who  bred  it,  what  it 
was  called,  and  whence  it  had  come  ?  What  need  existed  for  all  this  secrecy 
and  ignorance  and  ambiguity  about  a  single  pair  of  fowls?  It  is  too  late  to 
go  back  now,  and  say  in  one  sentence  (as  some  one  asserted  in  1873)  that  the 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  99 

"Light  Brahmas  came  to  this  country  from  India  in  1846,"  and  undertake  to 
explain  this  nonsense  by  stating  that  the  said  fowls  were  the  Cornish-Cham- 
berlin  stock ;  because  nobody  has  ever  yet  claimed  that  any  of  that  strain  of 
"  Light  Brahmas'7  were  seen  until  1851  and  1852,  and  these  were  only  chick- 
ens, or  one-year-old  birds.  If  "  they  were  brought  here  in  1846,"  where  were 
they,  pray,  from  1846  to  1850,  '51,  four  or  five  years  ?  when  every  competing 
fancier  and  poultry-raiser  in  New  England  —  such  active  men  as  Burnham, 
Bennett,  Capt.  Williams,  Marsh,  Dr.  Wight,  Balch,  Devereux,  Ad.  White, 
Buckminster,  Jaques,  Sampson,  and  a  hundred  others  —  were  constantly  on  the 
qui  vive,  in  search  of  large  fowls  and  novelties  in  poultry ;  and  who  travelled 
the  country  in  every  direction,  continually  looking  out  for  something  new, 
which  they  could  turn  to  profit,  in  this  line,  "without  regard  to  expense"? 

Is  it  at  all  probable,  if  such  birds  were  then  in  this  country,  that  some  of 
us  busy  searchers  for  "  marvellous  chickens  "  would  not  have  found  them,  or 
have  known  the  fact  of  their  existence,  for  five  long  years,  in  the  midst  of  the 
mania  then  current  for  the  biggest  and  most  extraordinary  fowls  to  be  had? 
Or  is  it  at  all  likely,  if  any  man  had  such  fowls  in  1846,  that  he  wouldn't 
have  let  somebody  know  it  in  1847,  1848,  and  1849,  when  the  rage  was  well 
known  to  have  existed  everywhere  in  England  and  America  for  Shanghaes 
and  Cochins  and  Chittagongs,  and  prices  for  good  specimens,  their  progeny, 
or  their  eggs,  were  approaching  the  fabulous  ? 

If  the  fowls  reported  to  have  been  brought  to  New  York  "by  some  sailors 
in  the  India  ships  "  were  the  ones  that  were  said  in  1873  to  have  "  arrived 
here  in  1846,"  will  some  one  kindly  prove  to  us  where  those  "  three  pairs  of 
imported  fowls,  of  enormous  size  "  were  secreted  —  among  them  this  "  one 
pair  of  Light  Gray  ones,"  and  their  progeny  —  from  1846  to  1851,  '52  ?  What 
became  of  the  old  pair  ?  why  were  they  never  exhibited  ?  where  did  they 
live  ?  where  did  they  die  ?  and  who  owned  them  at  last  ?  Can  anybody 
answer  these  queries  ?  I  think  not !  And  I  am  also  quite  positive  that,  what- 
ever may  be  the  facts  as  to  the  origin  of  the  Cornish  fowls,  no  "  Light  Brahmas 
came  to  this  country  in  1846,"  to  anybody.  And  it  is  quite  as  certain,  to  my 
view,  that  no  Brahmas  ever  "came  from  India,"  at  any  time,  to  America. 
Most  certain  is  it  that,  since  the  debut  of  my  Light  and  Dark  Brahmas  in 
the  United  States  and  England,  no  "  Brahmas  "  of  any  kind  have  again  been 
imported  from  anywhere  in  the  East,  into  Great  Britain  or  America. 

It  would  be  erroneous  to  assume  that  the  modem  Dark  Brahmas,  such  as 


100  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

have  in  late  years  been  received  in  this  country  from  England,  from  leading 
breeders  there,  are  not  sometimes  improved  birds  in  their  general  make-up. 
This  is  frankly  conceded,  especially  when  we  occasionally  meet  with  importa- 
tions from  that  country  believed  to  be  any  thing  near  the  mark  set  forth  in  the 
two  admirable  delineations  in  this  volume,  to  be  found  on  pages  93  and  101. 
But  these  representations,  though  very  attractive  to  look  at,  are  of  course  very 
partial,  or  are  largely  "  fancy  pictures."  We  have  bred  and  seen  and  handled 
a  great  many  hundreds  of  superior  Brahmas  in  our  time  ;  but  we  have  yet  to 
see  the  living  specimens  of  this  race  that  ever  equalled  these  "  portraits," 
as  they  are  designated  by  the  English  breeders  of  them  ;  and  we  greatly  doubt 
if  such  perfect  specimens  are  raised  there,  often ! 

Still  these  pictures  are  said  to  be  life-likenesses  of  representative  birds 
belonging  to  different  English  fanciers,  that  have  taken  first  prizes  •  at  sev- 
eral of  the  leading  Exhibitions  in  Great  Britain  in  1873  and  1874.  The 
nearest  approach  to  these  hens  that  we  have  ever  had  in  America  were  two  of 
the  five  extraordinary  Dark  Brahmas  shown  for  the  Churchman  prize  at 
Buffalo  in  January,  1874.  The  specimen  that  won,  in  that  show,  marked  97 
points,  according  to  the  old  standard,  and  is  a  very  extra  sample,  of  superb 
symmetry  and  color.  In  1873  we  bred,  among  a  considerable  number  of 
Dark  pullets,  two  only  of  the  pure  clear  steel-gray,  that  at  eighteen  months 
old  proved  splendid  hens.  But  they  do  not  equal  the  pictures  given  of  the 
English  prize  birds ;  and  we  never  expect  to  meet  with  the  reality  which 
these  fine  drawings  represent.  Both  these  pictures  show  us  very  perfect 
samples,  however,  and  these  are  a  very  good  pattern  for  ambitious  fanciers  to 
aim  to  equal  in  form,  feathering,  marking,  carriage,  and  general  contour. 

It  is  very  well  to  place  such  charming  specimens  publicly  before  the  readers 
of  the  poultry-books,  because  they  are  certainly  very  pleasant  to  contemplate ; 
and  it  may  be  that  some  of  our  enterprising  American  amateurs  or  fanciers  will 
be  tempted  to  strive  to  breed  quite  up  to  such  models.  It  may  be  that  it  has 
been  done  in  England.  But  we  doubt  if  any  such  birds  were  ever  produced, 
through  former  or  modern  efforts.  At  the  same  time,  we  commend  these 
to  the  notice  of  the  reader,  as  rare  models  indeed  ;  and  trust  that  some  Yankee 
breeder  may  succeed  in  producing  their  equals,  sooner  or  later.  Of  one  thing 
we  feel  pretty  certain :  none  of  us  will  ever  contrive  to  excel  them. 

In  the  Light  variety,  we  can  equal  the  English,  and  "  give  them  odds,"  yet. 
No  samples,  to  our  eye,  have  ever  been  bred'  abroad,  of  this  color,  such  as  a 


TRIO  OF   DARK  BBAHMAS.     Imported  by  S.  H.  Seamans,  Esq.,  Wauwatosa,  Wis. 


Choice  specimens  of  this  variety  are  bred  also  by  Wills  &  Peter,  Bloomington,  111;    C.  G.  Sanford, 
Providence,  R.I. ;    E.  J.  Taylor,  Waterloo,  N.Y.;    W.  S.  Randall,  Mich.,  etc. 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,   BRAHMA. 


103 


MODEL  OF  AN  AMERICAN  LIGHT  BRAHMA  HEN,  TWO  TEARS  OLD. 

dozen  leading  American  fanciers  have  in  their  yards  to-day,  by  scores ;  while, 
at  the  public  exhibitions  of  the  past  three  or  four  years  in  the  Eastern 
States,  as  well  as  at  Philadelphia,  Penn.,  and  at  Buffalo,  N.Y.,  individual 
cocks  and  hens  of  the  Light  Brahmas  have  been  shown  that  have  never  been 
equalled  in  Great  Britain,  and  will  be  hard  to  beat  in  this  country,  in  the 


104  THE   CHINA  FOWL. 

future.  And  we  now  refer  especially  to  the  prize  Light  B rah  mas  at  the  Bos- 
ton show  in  February,  1874,  the  contributions  of  Messrs.  Sturtevant  of  Fra- 
mingham,  and  Mr.  Buzzell  of  Clinton,  Mass.,  and  also  to  the  Plaisted  and 
Carpenter  fowls,  as  now  being  bred  in  Hartford,  Conn. 

It  is  not  my  design  in  these  pages  to  argue  the  question  of  origin.  I 
have  stated  and  will  state  only  patent  facts  regarding  the  nativity  of  my 
own  stock,  and  shall  quote  such  accounts  as  I  can  find,  or  am  familiar  with, 
in  reference  to  the  stock  of  other  importers.  If  what  I  record  in  this  book  is 
inaccurate,  the  error  will  be  unintentional;  and  I  shall  aim  to  be  very  care- 
ful in  my  statements. 

Yet,  so  far  as  I  am  informed  at  this  time,  I  have  herein  set  down  the 
exact  truth,  accompanied  with  veritable  vouchers  regarding  the  origin  of  my 
Gray  Shanghae,  or  now  so-called  "  Brahma  "  stock ;  and  I  believe  that  the  opin- 
ion I  have  expressed  and  have  always  entertained  in  reference  to  what  has  been 
claimed  as  another  strain,  is  entirely  in  accordance  with  reason  and  verity.  And 
the  more  I  see  of  this  splendid  stock  of  both  colors,  as  it  is  now  bred  from  year 
to  year  in  England  or  the  United  States,  the  more  firmly  am  I  convinced 
that  it  originated  alone  with  the  birds  first  in  my  possession ;  of  which,  as  to 
their  quality,  color,  proportions,  and  leading  characteristics,  I  give  the 
annexed  authentic  descriptions  from  1849  forward,  taken  from  the  pub- 
lished authorities,  —  which  I  quote  below,  with  dates,  and  names  of  the  sev- 
eral authors  who  have  hitherto  described  my  fowls ;  as  may  be  learned  by 
reference  to  the  original  statements,  copies  of  which  I  here  append  :  — 

"  This  is  a  very  superior  bird,  showy  in  plumage  ;  and  the  color  of  mine 
(the  Philadelphia  first  pair)  is  gray,  generally,  with  lightish  yellow  and 
white  feathers  on  pullets;  the  cock  gray  body,  tinted  with  stray  light  and 
white;  the  tail  and  breast  being  nearly  black."  —  G.  P.  Bumham's  descrip- 
tion, in  Dr.  Bennett's  Poultry  Book,  of  his  original  pair  received  from  Dr. 
Kerr  in  1849. 

"  This  fowl,  so  remarkable  for  size  and  beauty,  is  placed  first  among  domes- 
tic varieties,  as  the  true  gallus  giganteus.  The  specimens  (cock  and  hen) 
from  which  the  portraits  here  presented  were  taken  are  in  possession  of 
George  P.  Burnham,  Esq.,  of  Roxbury,  Mass.,  and  were  obtained  by  him 
from  Dr.  J.  J.  Kerr  (Asa  B-ugg),  near  Philadelphia,  Penn."  —  Dr.  J.  C. 
Bennett's  Poultry  Book,"  p.  27,  published  in  March,  1850. 

"  The  mature  fowls  presented  to  the  Queen  of  Great  Britain  left  me  in 
December,  1852.     The  'London  Illustrated  News'  of  Jan.  22,  1853,  says, 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  105 

1 A  very  choice  consignment  of  domestic  fowls  from  G.  P.  Burnham,  Esq., 
was  brought  to  Her  Majesty  Queen  Victoria,  by  last  steamer  from  the 
United  States.  They  are  denominated  "  Gray  Shanghaes  "  (in  contradis- 
tinction to  the  Red  or  Yellow  Shanghaes).  They  are  of  mammoth  propor- 
tions and  exquisite  plumage,  light  silvery  bodies,  approaching  white, 
delicately  traced  and  pencilled  with  black  upon  neck-hackles,  and  tips  of  wings 
and  tail.  The  whole  of  these  birds  are  almost  precisely  alike,  in  form, 
plumage,  and  general  characteristics.'  .  .  .  i  The  color  is  creamy  white, 
slightly  splashed  with  pale  straw-color,  tail  black,  and  hackles  pencilled  with 
black.'  "  —  Burnham? s  History  of  the  Hen  Fever,  pp.  102,  103,  in  1855. 
Extracted  from  London  News  of  February,  1853. 

"  Among  the  first  Light  Brahmas  ever  seen  in  England  were  those  sent 
here  by  Mr.  G.  P.  Burnham,"  says  Mr.  Tegetmeier  in  1867;  and,  in  the  same 
work  on  poultry,  Dr.  Wm.  Custe  Gwynne  says,  "  What  confirms  me  in  my 
view  as  to  the  identity  of  these  '  Brahmapootras  '  (so  called  by  Dr.  Ben- 
nett, who  sent  Dr.  Gwynne  his  fowls)  with  these  Shanghaes,  is  the  fact  that 
the  fowls  previously  presented  to  Her  Majesty  by  Mr.  Burnham,  under  the 
name  of  'Gray  Shanghaes,'  are  admitted  by  Dr.  Bennett  (the  author  of  the 
name  '  Brahmapootra ')  to  be  precisely  similar  to  his  own?'  —  Bev.  W. 
Wing  field's  London  Illustrated  Poultry  Book,  p.  177,  1853. 

"There  is  not  a  particle  of  evidence  to  show  that  these  fowls  were  e im- 
ported from  India?  From  all  we  can  learn  from  naturalists  and  others  who 
have  visited  that  part  of  the  world,  no  such  race  of  birds  have  ever  been  seen 
or  known  there.  In  fact,  they  did  not  originate  in  India,  but  in  America."  — 
London  Illustrated  Poultry  Book,  by  Tegetmeier,  1867'. 

"  The  Light  Brahmas  are  undoubtedly  identical  with  those  Gray  birds  that 
in  the  first  importation  came  from  Shanghae  ;  and  public  attention  was  first 
called  to  them  by  an  acute  fancier,  Mr.  Geo.  P.  Burnham,  presenting  a  con- 
signment of  them  to  Her  Majesty  the  Queen,  in  1852."  ..."  These 
birds  were  subsequently  exhibited  by  His  Royal  Highness  the  late  Prince 
Albert,  at  the  London  and  Birmingham  shows,  as  'Brahmapootras.'  These 
Light  Brahmas,  with  pure  white  or  cream-colored  bodies,  and  elegantly  pen- 
cilled hackles,  were  in  great  favor,  and  were  universally  admired  for  their 
beauty,  &c,  when  suddenly  a  new  variety  sprang  upon  the  scene.  A  pair  of 
birds  were  shown  at  Birmingham  (in  1853),  which  were  sold  for  100  guineas. 
These  were  dark  colored,  and  different  from  the  others.  They  were  the  first 
'Dark  Brahmas'  ever  seen  in  this  country.  They' were  sent  from  Mr.  G. 
P.  Burnham  of  the  United  States,  to  Mr.  John  Baily  of  London,  in  1853  ; 
and  Mr.  Taylor  of  Shepard's  Bush  was  the  purchaser  of  this  pair  at  the 
Birmingham  Exhibition,"  at  the  figure  above  mentioned. —  Tegetmeier s 
Poultry  Book  (Illustrated)  in  1867. 


106 


THE  CHINA   FOWL. 


"We  have  found,  in  our  own  yards,  that  we  could  soon  breed  black  Brah- 
mas  (?)  if  such  were  desired;  or  that  in  three  seasons,  by  choosing  the 
lightest,  we  could  produce  almost  clear  white  ones ;  and,  as  the  original 
birds  were  somewhat  darker  than  the  '  Light  Brahmas '  now  shown,  either 
color  (Dark  or  Light)  could  have  been  bred  from  them  with  still  greater 
rapidity  and  ease." — Lewis  Wright,  Illustrated  Poultry  Book,  in  1870, 
p.  246. 

Both  the  Light  and  the  Dark  "  Brahmas,"  as  they  are  bred  in  England 
and  America  to-day,  are  strong  types  of  the  true  Gray  Shanghae  race.     For 


DARK  BRAHMAS,   BRED   BY  J.  M.  WADE,   PHILADELPHIA,   PA.,   1873. 


five-and-twenty  years  they  have  continued  on  in  their  unrivalled  beauty  of 
form,  plumage,  great  size,  and  admirable  qualities  for  usefulness  among  poul- 
try ;  and  no  one  who  breeds  these  varieties  as  they  should  be  bred  —  uncon- 
taminated,  amongst  themselves  —  can  fail  to  be  delighted  with  the  results. 
Mr.  Plaisted  says,  in  his  recently-published  history,  that  "  the  birds  Mr. 
Burnham  sent  to  England  he  knows  nothing  about ;  "  but  that  the  birds  he 
and  Dr.  Bennett  sent  out  there  bred  Buff  chickens,  and  he  "  was  more  afraid 
of  this  stock  "  (which  he  claims  is  the  Cornish-Chamberlin  strain,  pure) 
"  throwing  buff  chickens,"  sometimes,  "  after  he  sent  his  fowls  to  England, 
than  of  any  thing  else." 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  107 

This  might  have  been  so  with  Mr.  Plaisted's  birds ;  and  we  all  know  that 
Dr.  Bennett's  stock  at  the  outset  had  the  buff  or  light  drab  silver-cinnamon 
cross  in  it.  But  i"  never  knew  of  the  first  instance,  until  Wright  falsely  thrust 
my  name  into  a  misquoted  paragraph  on  this  point  in  his  "  Book  of  Poultry," 
where  chickens  from  my  fowls  came  of  "  a  buff  color."  And  I  do  not  believe 
it  ever  occurred. 

At  all  events,  I  can-  solemnly  aver  that  I  have  bred  thousands  upon  thou- 
sands of  my  own  stock,  and  I  know  of  other  thousands  that  have  been  bred, 
in  both  countries,  that  never  failed  in  the  last  quarter  of  a  century  to 
breed  only  pure  Light  and  Dark  Gray  fowls.  They  are  naturally  a  parti- 
colored bird,  black  and  white ;  and  the  range  of  color  in  chickens,  for  years, 
was  uneven,  coming  lighter  or  darker  at  times,  —  from  which,  in  subsequent 
mating,  either  for  breeding  or  for  selling,  it  was  found  advisable  to  match  the 
birds  nearest  of  a  color  together.  But  never  a  Buff  chicken  have  I  met  with, 
yet,  in  my  Gray  progeny.  And  I  have  yet  to  learn  authentically  of  any  one 
who  has  bred  them  pure,  as  /tried  to  breed  them  —  by  themselves  —  who  has 
ever  encountered  this  variation  in  the  true  Burnham  stock. 

And  here  I  reprint  an  article  from  a  correspondent  of  "  The  New  York 
Bulletin,"  Mr.  Walker  Waite  (now  of  Brooklyn,  formerly  of  Mass.),  an  early 
patron  of  mine,  who  thus  tells  his  experience  with  my  Gray  Shanghae  stock, 
in  1874.     He  says,  — 

"A  recent  writer  (Mr.  C.  C.  Plaisted)  in  a  poultry  monthly  commences 
a  history  of  the  early"  days  of  the  Brahmapootra  fowl,  and  tells  us  some 
new  things  about  the  long-contested  question  as  to  where  the  first  ones 
came  from.  I  don't  think  it  is  much  of  an  object  to  know  this  ;  but,  whatever 
is  the  true  account,  this  writer  has  stated  several  glaring  mistakes  in  his  first 
article  on  this  subject.  His  dates  are  wrong  and  mixed ;  or  else  Mr.  Cor- 
nish's and  Chamberlin's  and  the  'old  salt's'  account,  and  Wright,  Teget- 
meier,  Burnham,  Bennett,  and  twenty  others,  are  wrong.  His  original  fowls, 
—  that  is,  the  first  Chamberlin  pair,  —  Mr.  Cornish  says,  'came  into  Connect- 
icut from  New  York  early  in  1849,  and  he  got  his  stock  of  Chamberlin, 
next  season.'  Was  there  another  pair  of  large  Light  Gray  fowls  got  by  this 
same  Mr.  Chamberlin,  through  another  sailor,  two  years  before  this?  —  or,  as 
this  new  writer  says,  '  by  a  Mr.  Knox,  in  1847,  for  Mr.  Chamberlin.' 

"  I  never  before  heard  of  this,  if  it  is  so.  But  I  think  it  must  refer  to  1S49, 
when  Cornish  first  tells  his  story  (in  his  letter,  March  2,  1852).  At  all 
events,  one  other  poinLin  this  article  is  new,  and  that  is  that  this  Gray  stock 
produced  Buff  fowls.     This  writer  says  indirectly,  at  random,  that  '  the  early 


108  THE   CHINA    FOWL. 

Brahmas  sent  to  England  by  himself,  Dr.  Bennett,  Hatch,  &c,  which  Mr. 
Lewis  Wright  lias  described  as  "  Dr.  Bennett's  pure  Brahmas,"  in  breeding 
showed  many  different  colors ;  the  most  objectionable  being  pure  buff,  as 
fine  as  we  see  to-day  among  the  Buff  Cochins.7 

"I  have  bred  the  Light  and  Dark  Gray  birds  several  years.  I  had  my  first 
ones  from  Mr.  Burnham,  and  from  eggs  I  bought  of  him,  direct;  and  I  have 
had  the  Cornish  stock  since.  I  bred  them  in  1852,  '53,  '54,  and  after  that 
in  1859,  '60.  But  I  never  yet  saw  a  Buff  chicken  out  of  either  of  these  Gray 
strains ;  and,  if  there  was  any  one  thing  the  Burnham  "  Gray  Shanghae  " 
stock  did,  it  was  that  they  bred  true  to  color,  as  long  as  I  had  them.  I  have 
no  doubt  all  this  stock  comes  from  one  parentage,  and  that  it  is  all  Chinese, 
and  not  East  India  poultry.  Mr.  Burnham  unquestionably  gave  us  the  first 
specimens,  —  whether  they  were  good  or  poor ;  and  the  others  probably  came 
out  of  the  same  stock  his  did,  in  some  way." 

In  furtherance  of  my  opinion,  I  affirm  that  at  the  very  last  annual  ex- 
hibitions of  poultry  in  Massachusetts,  Connecticut,  and  New  York  State,  the 
first  premium  "  Brahma "  fowls,  both  Dark  and  Light,  were  the  exact 
counterparts  in  color,  form,  and  markings  of  the  best  specimens  I  showed  in 
Boston,  and  sent  out  to  England  to  Her  Majesty  the  Queen,  to  Mr.  John 
Baily  of  London,  and  others,  in  1851,  '52,  and  '53. 

In  September,  1870,  Mr.  John  Baily  wrote  me  on  the  subject  of  Brahmas 
these  words :  "  I  continue  to  breed  from  the  progeny  the  old  type  of  '  Brah- 
mas' which  you  sent  me  sixteen  years  ago,  as  you  may  have  observed  from 
the  fine  birds  I  have  sent  hence  to  Mr.  Philander  Williams  and  others  in  the 
United  States."  These  choice  Brahmas,  which  Mr.  Baily  has  thus  returned 
to  the  United  States  (bred  out  of  my  original  stock),  have  taken  prizes  re- 
peatedly, as  their  parents  did  before  them,  at  the  principal  exhibitions  in 
America,  in  the  last  half-a-dozen  years,  —  Mr.  Philander  Williams's  splendid 
samples  frequently  bearing  off  the  palm  among  the  best,  as  everybody  in  this 
country  is  aware.  A  Worcester  (Mass.)  correspondent  of  "The  Fancier's 
Journal "  thus  puts  it,  in  July  1874.     He  says, 

"The  real  facts  are:  Dr.  Bennett  bought  of  Mr.  Burnham  the  very  old 
gray  pair  that  Dr.  Kerr  sent  to  Burnham  from  Philadelphia  in  1849.  Dr. 
Bennett  bred  them,  and  in  1851  or  1852  exhibited  chickens  from  them, 
which  were  the  first  Brahmas,  or  then  called  l  Burrampooters '  (see  Report 
of  show)  ever  shown.  If  this  name  was  established  in  1850  (as  Mr.  Wright 
makes  Cornish  say  in  1869,  though  in  1852  Mr.  Cornish  himself  then  calls 
them  '  Chittagongs/  in  his  original  letter),  why  did  not  Dr.  Bennett,  in  his 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,   BRAHMA.  109 

Poultry  Book  in  1850,  '51,  illustrate  and  describe  these  fowls  of  Cornish's  ? 
Dr.  Bennett  does  not  mention  the  word  Cornish,  '  Burrampooter,'  '  Brahma- 
pootra/ or  ' Brahma,'  in  his  entire  book.     Why  not  ? 

"  Mr.  Wright  says  he  'was  an  enthusiastic  admirer  of  Brahmas,'  and  'got 
his  stock  of  Cornish.'  Cornish  says  this  '  name  was  established  in  1850.' 
How  can  this  be  '  correct  history  ?  '  If  these  fine  fowls  had  been  known  as 
Brahmas  in  1850,  when  Bennett  (who  loved  them  so  dearly,  according  to 
Wright)  wrote  and  published  his  descriptions  of  Burnham's  stock  and 
others,  would  not  Dr.  Bennett  have  been  likely  to  know  something  of  the  ex- 
istence of  Mr.  Cornish  or  his  fowls  ?  I  think  this  is  clear ;  and  I  have  never 
yet  seen  this  important  point  brought  forward.  It  certainly  cannot  be  true 
that  this  '  Brahma '  name  was  established  in  1850.  Probably  Mr.  Cornish 
meant  1852,  or  later  —  for  he  says  himself,  in  his  first  published  letter,  March 
2,  1852,  that  they  were  called  '  Chittagong.'  At  that  time  Mr.  Burnham 
had  been  breeding  the  Light  Gray  birds,  which  he  always  called  'Gray 
Shanghaes,'  I  believe,  for  several  years,  according  to  Dr.  Bennett's  authority. 

"  Mr.  Wright  is  very  clearly  at  fault  in  this  respect ;  and  his  statement  in 
his  'Brahma  Fowl,'  that  'the  first  pair  of  Cornish  fowls  ever  bred  came  into 
Connecticut  in  1849,'  contradicts  his  own  witness,  Cornish,  also,  who  says,  in 
1869,  that  the  fowls  came  in  1846.  Mr.  Wright's  theory  about  this  question 
seems  to  be  the  worst  thing  he  ever  tried  to  prove,  with  the  conflicting  testi- 
mony he  has  thus  far  produced;  while  I  think  no  poultry  man  in  America, 
at  least,  ever  put  any  faith  in  the  stupid  '  sailor's  story.'  And  the  statement 
of  'F.  R.  W.'  that  Mr.  Wright  is  acknowledged  to  be  the  best  living  author- 
ity on  this  breed  of  fowls,  is  simply  ridiculous.  How  could  he,  three  thou- 
sand miles  away,  know  any  thing  on  this  subject  of  origin,  except  what  he 
reads  or  hears  about  from  this  side  of  the  water  ?  " 

Mr.  Mark  Pitman  of  Salem,  Mass.^  an  old,  cautious,  experienced  breeder 
of  Chinese  fowls,  who  knows  as  much  about  the  origin  of  the  "  Brahmas  " 
as  does  any  American  fancier,  has  within  a  few  years  publicly  stated  that 
"the  Light  and  Dark  Brahmas,  as  originally  bred,  have  both  nearly  the 
same  origin  ; "  and  that  "  they  were  not  imported,  but  were  bred  first  in  this 
country."  Mr.  Pitman  adds,  that  "Mr.  G.  P.  Burnham,  who  surprised  not 
only  the  royal  family  of  Queen  Victoria,  but  all  the  breeders  of  fowls  in 
England  (in  1852),  by  his  present  of  an  elegant  lot  of  mature  Light 
Brahmas,  then  sent  to  Her  Majesty  the  Queen,  saw  in  the  Dark  variety  still 
greater  remuneration,  and  disposed  of  them  at  what  might  even  now  be 
termed  fabulous  prices.  This  variety  at  once  took  the  lead  of  all  others  (for 
a  time)  ;  and  from  this  stock  many  of  the  large  breeders  of  England  and 
Ireland  were  supplied  subsequently."     And,  from  the  progeny  of  these  birds, 


110  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

which  I  sent  to  Great  Britain,  as  in  the  instance  of  Mr.  Baily  of  Mount 
Street,  London  (one  of  the  leading  dealers  in  England),  have  come  back  to 
the  United  States  from  Ireland  and  England  during  the  years  1865  and 
1866  down  to  1873,  ?74,  scores  of  trios  of  choice  Dark  Brahma  birds,  again 
the  counterparts,  with  but  slight  variation,  of  the  superior  samples  I  first  sent 
out  to  Mr.  Baily  in  1853. 

In  further  confirmation  of  "this  position  as  to  priority  of  date  in  the 
introduction  of  the  Dark  Brahmas  to  public  notice,  I  quote  from  the  columns 
of  "  The  New- York  Poultry  Bulletin,"  in  the  month  of  June,  1874,  this 
sentence,  from  the  advertisement  of  Mr.  John  Baily  &  Son  of  London,  still 
running  in  that  magazine:  " Now  ready  for  immediate  shipment, —  Brah- 
mas, Light  and  Dark ;  the  former  from  English  cocks  and  Philander  Wil- 
liams's pullets ;  the  latter  direct  descent  from  G.  P.  Burnham's  original  con- 
signment to  us  "  (in  1853). 

The  theory  of  the  advocates  of  the  Cornish-Charnberlin-Bennett-Hatch- 
Brahmapodtra  origin  is,  first,  that  Chamberlin  (vide  Cornish  in  1852) 
"  brought  his  fowls  into  Connecticut  in  the  early  part  of  1849."  In  1869, 
this  same  Mr.  Cornish  appears  to  have  been  drawn  out  in  a  second  letter,  by 
a  Mr.  Weld  (whom  nobody  previously  had  heard  of),  to  aver  that  "the 
Chamberlin  fowls  came  from  Luckipoor  in  India,  up  the  Brahmapootra 
River,  into  New  York  in  September,  1846."  This  goes  back  of  his  first 
plain  assertion,  according  to  Lewis  Wright,  three  years.  The  reasons  for 
this  second  story  I  will  explain  in  the  closing  chapter  to  this  volume. 

In  1874,  Mr.  Plaisted  of  Connecticut,  who  claims  to  be  "  the  oldest 
breeder  of  Light  Brahmas  in  America  "  (and  who  was  formerly  a  partner,  in 
1853,  of  Dr.  Bennett,  the  author  of  the  "Brahmapootra"  name),  writes  as 
follows,  in  an  article  furnished  to  "  The  Hartford  Poultry  World,"  page  124, 
in  June :  — 

"  The  first  pair  of  these  fowls,  about  which  there  has  been  so  much  dis- 
cussion, and  so  much  written,  were  brought  by  one  Charles  Knox  to  Mr. 
Nelson  H.  Chamberlin,  a  resident  of  Hartford,  Conn.,  in  1847.  They  were 
first  bred  by  Mr.  Chamberlin  in  1848.  .  .  .  Mr.  Chamberlin  paid  for  his  first 
pair  of  these  fowls  the  sum  of  five  dollars,  — considered  at  that  time  a  fabu- 
lous price.  .  .  .  Charles  Knox  was  at  that  time  clerk  on  a  propeller  running 
between  Hartford  and  New  York,  and  was  cousin  to  Mr.  Chamberlin's  wife. 
Having  been  requested  by  Mr.  Chamberlin  to  purchase  a  nice  pair  of  fowls 
in  New  York,  —  something  new,  —  Mr.  Knox  soon  reported  seeing  two  pairs 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  Ill 

(not  three  pairs,  as  Cornish,  stated  in  his  1852  letter),  one  red,  the  other 
gray,  just  arrived  on  an  East-India  vessel,  and  that  he  had  the  refusal  of  a 
pair  until  the  next  trip.  The  result  was  the  selection  of  the  Grays  at 
a  venture,  and  their  removal  to  Hartford.  Mr.  Chamberlin  related  these 
facts  to  me,  himself." 

The  final  conclusions  of  Lewis  Wright's  labored  argument,  put  forth  to 
prove  whatf  never  existed,  and  which  never  had  the  slightest  foundation  in 
fact,  are  thus  expressed  by  this  English  "  authority,"  in  the  last  paragraph 
of  his  "  Brahma  Fowl,  a  Monograph : "  — 

"It  will  be  observed  that  the  original  importation  being  now  determined 
so  early  as  1846,"  .  .  .  "there  is  not  the  slightest  reason  to  question,  that 
both  Light  and  Dark  Brahmas  may  have  been  derived  from  the  one  stock 
introduced  into  Connecticut  by  Mr.  Chamberlin"  (when?)  "and  afterwards 
fostered  by  Mr.  Cornish  and  Dr.  Bennett."  ..."  The  testimony  (Mr.  Cor- 
nish's), so  full  and  explicit,  must  be  considered  finally  to  settle  this  question" 
—  of  the  origin  and  "  importation  "  of  the  Chamberlin-Cornish  pair  of  fowls. 

We  have  shown,  in  this  volume,  that  no  ship  "  arrived  at  New  York  from 
Luckipoor  in  India,"  either  in  1849  or  1846,  as  Cornish  states  in  his  two 
letters  of  1852  and  1869.  We  have  also  shown  that  no  such  "  East-India 
vessel "  arrived  in  New  York  in  1847,  as  a  later  writer  has  it.  And  we  have 
adduced  ample  recorded  evidence,  dating  long  prior  to  the  appearance  of 
Cornish,  or  his  fowls  in  public,  which  shows  that  the  Burnham  "Gray 
Shanghaes  "  had  been  seen,  talked  about,  written  of,  pictured,  published  in 
the  poultry  papers  and  books ;  and  were  everywhere  known,  as  early  as  in 
1849,  to  be  "at  the  head  of  the.  list  of  modern  domestic  varieties"  at  that 
period  in  the  world.  And  it  will  thus  be  seen  that  all  there  is  to  this  con- 
troversy is,  therefore,  resolved  into  the  following  simple  facts,  to  wit :  — 

The  Chamberlin-Cornish-Bennett  pair  of  large  Gray  fowls  were  first  seen 
"  in  Connecticut  in  the  early  part  of  1849,"  in  Chamberlin's  hands.  They 
were  stated  to  have  been  picked  up  somewhere,  by  "  a  sailor,"  who  "  bought 
them  at  a  great  price"  ($5.00  the  pair,  so  Chamberlin  tells  Plaisted  in 
1874)  ;  and  Cornish  bought  his  stock  the  next  year  of  Chamberlin,  in  1850. 
In  1851  or  1852,  a  Mr.  Hatch  exhibited  a  few  young  Light  Gray  chickens, 
which  he  called  "  Chittagongs."  Cornish  says  the  name  Brahmapootra 
"was  established    in    1850."     Mr.  Plaisted    says,  "in    all    Cornish's    state- 


112  THE  CHINA   FOWL. 

merits  to  Wright,  Cornish   is   one  year  earlier  in   date   than  he   ought  to 
be."  * 

But  there  was  positively  no  "importation"  of  this  pair  of  fowls,  at  all. 
This  is  a  sure  thing.  They  were  purchased  for  Chamberlin  unquestionably 
from  my  stock,  sold  into  Connecticut  and  New  York  long  before  1852,  when 
Cornish's  first  letter  is  dated  ;  though  this  letter  did  not  get  before  the  public 
until  it  appeared  in  "  The  Domestic  Poultry  Book "  in  New  York  (which 
very  few  persons  ever  saw),  and  in  Miss  Watts's  "  Poultry  Yard,  "  in  1853 
or  1854,  in  London.  And  I  have  also  shown  by  the  judges'  official  reports  at 
the  exhibitions  of  1852  and  1854,  in  Boston  and  New  York,  that  the  name 
Brahmapootra  was  not  even  then  fixed  upon ;  although  Cornish  avers,  in 
his  last  letter  to  Weld,  "  that  this  name  was  established  in  1850." 

It  may  possibly  savor  of  undue  curiosity  in  me  ;  but  /  would  like,  for  one,  to 
know  where  this  fabled  stock  was  in  1849,  for  instance,  when  the  first  great 
fowl  show  took  place,  in  the  month  of  November  of  that  year,  at  the  Public 
Garden,  in  Boston  ?  Here  is  a  glorious  opportunity  now  for  Weld,  Cornish, 
Wright,  or  some  other  "live  man"  (Dr.  Bennett  is  dead,  unfortunately),  to  give 
us  some  new  version  in  answer  to  this  pertinent  query,  namely ;  if  the  Cham- 
berlin-Cornish  fowls  did  come  "into  Connecticut  in  1846,"  and  Cornish 
"  bought  the  first  brood  in  1847,  and  the  old  pair  f  in  April,  1848,"  as  he  "  ex- 
plicitly" states  he  did  in  his  second  (1869)  letter  to  Weld, — -and  he  had  then 
been  breeding  them  three  years,  of  course,  —  where  were  all  these  fowls  on 
the  15th  and  16th  of  the  eleventh  month  of  the  year  1849,  when  all  New 
England  was  astir  with  the  fowl  mania  when  the  first  exhibition  came  off  in 
Boston  ? 

This  question  suggests  itself  to  me  for  the  first  time  as  I  write  these  lines, 
in  the  month  of  July,  1874.  And  I  turn  once  more  to  the  printed  records 
which  I  find  in  Dr.  Bennett's  Poultry  Book,  issued  in  March,  1850,  and 
in  the  Boston  agricultural  papers  of  December,  1849.  I  now  quote  from 
the  official  report  of  the  November  (1849)  show,  —  Col.  Jaques  of  "  Ten 
Hills  Farm,"  President,  and  Chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Supervision :  — 
"  This  exhibition  may  be  said  to  have  been  in  its  character  unprecedented 

*  "  I  do  not  consider  Cornish's  stories  worth  a  pin.  There  is  nothing  '  accurate '  in  his  Jirst  state- 
ment, and  his  last  one  is  still  worse!  "     [C.  C.  Plaisted,  in  Poultry  World,  1874.] 

f  Mr.  Plaisted  thus  writes  in  1874:  "Mr.  Cornish  did  not  purchase  Chamberlin's  first  brood; 
neither  did  he  ever  own  the  '  old  pair,'  at  any  time  —  as  I  can  prove." 


SHANGHAE,   COCHIN,  BRAHMA.  113 

in  this  country ;  .  .  .  and  the  results  have  been  peculiarly  gratifying,  both  as 
regards  the  number  and  variety  and  the  quality  of  the  different  breeds  of 
poultry  shown,  and  the  interest  manifested  in  this  display  by  the  public.  .  .  . 
The  number  of  specimens  of  the  different  feathered  races  presented  on  this 
occasion  was  1,423 ;  the  number  of  exhibitors  was  219  recorded.  The  num- 
ber of  people  admitted  to  this  show  was  not  less  than  ten  thousand.  ...  Of 
the  gallinaceous  family,  the  display  was  very  extensive.  .  .  .  Several  varie- 
ties were  offered  under  the  names  of  Chinas,  Cochin  Chinas,  Shanghaes, 
Bucks  County,  Jersey  Blues,  and  Javas"  (ne'er  a  "Brahmapootra,"  a  "  Chit- 
tagong,"  or  a  "  Bother'em  "  then  in  the  entire  category  ! ),  "  and  the  exhibit- 
ors of  which  were  J.  Giles,  Providence ;  J.  W.  French,  Randolph ;  George 
P.  Burnham,  Roxbury  ;  Francis  Alden,  Dedham  ;  G.  W.  George,  Haverhill ; 
Adm.  White,  East  Randolph  ;  B.  W.  Balch,  Dedham;  A.  A.  Andrews,  West 
Roxbury ;  T.  Thorpe,  Cambridge  ;  Rev.  C.  B.  Marsh,  West  Roxbury ;  H.  L. 
Devereux,  Boston ;  Messrs.  Pierce  and  Osborn,  Danvers ;  George  E.  White, 
Melrose  ;  John  C.  Bennett,  Plymouth  ;  Samuel  Jaques,  Medford  ;  Josiah  H. 
Sticloiey,  Watertown;  John  Eaton,  Reading,  and  fifty-two  others — all  con- 
tributing specimens  of  the  Chinese,  or  then  so-called  Asiatic  races.  .  .  .  Un- 
der the  head  of  crosses  of  various  breeds  and  varieties,  the  committee  would 
mention  as  worthy  of  notice  the  Plymouth  Rock  Fowls,  so  called  by  Dr.  J. 
C.  Bennett  of  Plymouth,  and  presented  by  George  P.  Burnham  of  Roxbury." 
(This  was  the  only  notable  cross  mentioned  by  the  committee.)  "  The  other 
contributors  numbered  151,  and  entered  the  different  varieties  of  Dorkings, 
Black  Spanish,  Games,  Gueldres,  Cres.ted  Fowls,  Bantams,  Hamburgs,  Top- 
knots," &c,  &c. 

Here,  in  November,  1849,  were  shown  nearly  fifteen  hundred  specimens  of 
the  different  kinds  of  fowls  then  known,  from  all  quarters ;  and  there  were 
over  two  hundred  contributors.  But  there  were  then  no  Chamberlins,  no 
Cornishes,  no  Knoxes,  no  Welds,  no  Wrights,  no  Sailors,  nO  "  Brahmapoo- 
tras,  no  "  Chittagongs,"  mentioned ;  and  these  men,  or  their  so-called  fowls 
(which  are  lastly,  in  1869,  said  to  have  been  in  Connecticut  at  that  time  over 
three  years,  if  they  came  in  1846),  were  entirely  unknown,  unhonored,  and 
unrepresented  in  that  great  New  England  exhibition  !  Verily,  this  is  strange, 
if  the  1869  statements  of  Cornish  to  Weld  be  true.  And  Mr.  Lewis  Wrisht 
can  put  the  above  facts  into  his  pipe,  and  smoke  them  a  good  while,  ere  he 
will  be  able  to  answer  my  reiterated  query :  Where  were  your  Cornish-Cham- 
berlin  Brahmapootras,  of  which,  on  page  144  of  your  "  Brahma  Fowl  History," 
you  declare  "the  original  importation  is  now  determined"  (according  to  your 
sophistry)  "so  early  as  in  1846,"  and  which  must  thus  have  been  in  Con- 
necticut fully  three   years,  "being  fostered  by  Cornish  and  Dr.  Bennett." 


114  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

Where  were  they,  I  ask,  on  the  occasion  of  this  notable  public  fowl  show  in 
Boston,  in  November,  1849  ?     Answer  me  that,  Master  Wright ! 

Why  all  these  falsehoods  and  contradictions  and  inconsistencies  about  "  one 
pair  of  Light  Gray  fowls  "  should  have  thus  ever  been  originated  or  fostered  by 
any  or  all  of  these  people,  and  why  Lewis  Wright  should  thus  back  up  this 
fabrication  and  deception  with  his  added  nonsense  and  sophistry  and  misrep- 
resentations, is  certainly  inexplicable  to  ordinary  comprehension,  when  it  is 
beyond  cavil  or  question  that  there  were  no  "  imported "  birds  involved  in 
this  sailor's  story  at  all.  There  was  no  ship  at  New  York,  as  stated ;  no  sailor 
(according  to  Plaisted,  who  says  in  June,  1874,  they  "came  in  the  hands  of 
one  Mr.  Knox,  clerk  on  a  propeller  running  between  Hartford  and  New 
York "  ) ;  and,  over  and  above  all,  when  nobody  from  1846,  1847,  1849,  or 
1852  has  ever  been  able  to  tell  us  who  any  of  the  Cornish-described  parties 
were,  as  at  first  mentioned,  namely  —  sailor,  owner,  ship,  captain,  date,  age  of 
fowls,  or  any  other  fact  bearing  upon  this  interesting  subject !  It  is  all  myth. 
It  was  false  from  the  start.  Dr.  John  C.  Bennett  coined  this  sailor's  yarn 
originally,  and  the  others  tacitly  agreed  to  it.  The  fowls  were  from  my  yards, 
or  out  of  my  stock.  And  Bennett  never  denied  this  in  America  or  England, 
for  he  couldn't,  had  he  wished  to  do  so,  while  /  lived ;  and  he  knew  this  fact 
as  i"  did,  which  accounts  for  the  non-mention  of  me  in  all  those  days !  ' 

All  this  occurred,  according  to  Mr.  Plaisted,  in  1847  (not  in  1849  or  1846, 
as  Cornish  has  it,  in  two  different  places).  But  on  all  three  of  these  occasions 
there  is  only  one  pair  of  gray  fowls ;  Chamberlin  is  the  first  man  who  got 
them ;  and,  every  time,  they  came  either  "in  the  India  ships"  to  New  York, 
"in  a  ship  from  Luckipoor  in  India"  to  New  York,  or  lastly  "just  arrived  on 
an  East  India  vessel "  at  New  York. 

In  neither  of  which  accounts  is  there  one  word  of  truth,  as  to  the  "  impor- 
tation "  of  these  fowls ;  as  I  will  in  another  chapter  further  on  proceed  to  show, 
beyond  the  possibility  of  contradiction.  The  accounts  I  have  quoted  from 
Mr.  Cornish's  letters  have  long  been  before  the  public,  and  Lewis  Wright 
has  revamped  and  rehashed  them  both  (most  audaciously  and  bunglingly,  I 
know,)  in  his  two  latest  works.  But  there  never  was  a  syllable  of  truth  in 
either,  as  Mr.  Plaisted  avers  in  1874,  when  he  writes,  "  I  would  ask  Mr. 
Burnham  what  Cornish's  accounts  are  worth,  from  first  to  last  ? "  To 
which  I  can  only  reply,  "  Not  much !  Yet  Lewis  Wright  makes  the  most 
of  them,  to  be  sure  !  " 


PAIR  OF  LIGHT  BEAHMAS,  BRED  BY  DR.  C.  H.   KENEGY,   POLO,  ILL. 


SELECTION    AND    MATING, 

TO    BREKD    "  STANDARD  n    BIRDS. 

I  deem  it  appropriate,  after  describing  and  portraying  as  I  have  done  in 
the  previous  pages  of  this  work  the  general  history,  characteristics,  shape, 
color,  and  qualities  of  the  China  fowls  we  have  had  and  now  have  in  this 
country,  to  add  a  chapter  here  embodying  my  views,  and  briefly  offering  the 
results  of  my  own  experience,  in  the  matter  of  mating  or  matching  individ- 
ual fowls,  for  the  production  of  high-class  specimens  of  the  "  Cochins  "  and 
"Brahmas  "  for  the  exhibition-rooms. 

"  Like  will  produce  its  like,"  is  an  old  adage.  As  a  rule,  this  is  truthful. 
It  depends  in  a  great  measure,  in  the  reproduction  of  ike  fowl  species,  how- 


116  TEE  CHINA  FOWL. 

ever,  upon  what  the  character  of  the  stock  to  he  duplicated  is ;  how  long 
the  strains  may  have  been  bred  in-and-in  (through  relations)  ;  how  pure  it 
was  originally;  and  how  it  is  subsequently  mated  (the  males  with  the 
females), —  whether  or  not  success  will  follow,  even  upon  the  most  carefully 
planned  experiments  attempted  in  this  direction. 

Darwin,  in  his  exhaustive  work  on  the  "Variations  of  Animals,"  states 
that  "  the  reproductive  system  is  highly  susceptible  to  changes  in  the  condi- 
tions of  life  ;  but  why —  because  this  reproducing  system  is  disturbed  — this 
or  that  part  should  vary  more  or  less,  we  are  profoundly  ignorant.  Yet  we 
can  here  and  there  catch  a  faint  ray  of  light."  And  among  these  "  faint 
rays  "  is  this  important  one,  namely,  the  clearly  apparent  influence  of  the 
male  first  having  fruitful  intercourse  with  the  female,  upon  her  subsequent 
offspring  by  other  males.  In  demonstration  of  this  point,  we  quote  the  an- 
nexed fact,  related  by  Sir  Edward  Home :  "  A  young  chestnut  mare,  of  seven- 
eighths  Arabian  blood,  which  belonged  to  the  Earl  of  Morton,  was  served  in 
the  year  1815  by  a  quagga,  —  a  species  of  native  wild  ass,  from  Africa, 
whose  skin-markings  are  not  unlike  those  of  the  zebra.  This  seven-eighths 
Arabian  mare  was  covered  but  once  by  this  quagga  (by  way  of  experiment), 
and  gave  birth  to  a  hybrid  colt,  which  had,  as  was  anticipated,  the  distinct 
markings  of  the  striped  quagga,  in  the  shape  of  head,  black  bars  on  legs, 
shoulders,  &c.  In  1817, 1818,  and  1821,  two,  three,  and  six  years  afterwards, 
this  same  mare  was  served  by  a  fine  black  full-bred  Arabian  stallion,  and  she 
threw  three  colts  in  those  years.  Although  she  had  not  seen  the  quagga 
since  1816,  all  these  colts  bore  his  curious  and  unequivocal  markings." 

Numerous  instances  of  this  kind  could  be  cited,  and  the  principle  is  clearly 
established  among  horse  and  cattle  breeders.  Mr.  James  McGrilivray,  a  noted 
Scotch  veterinary  surgeon,  has  stated,  sensibly,  that  "when  once  a  pure 
animal  of  any  breed  has'  been  pregnant  to  an  animal  of  another  breed,  such 
pregnant  animal  is  a  cross  forever,  incapable  of  producing  pure  progeny,  after- 
wards, of  any  breed."  This  result  —  under  similar  treatment  —  in  any  race 
of  animals,  is  the  same ;  whether  it  be  horses,  cattle,  rabbits,  sheep,  dogs,  or 
poultry.  I  have  proved  this,  beyond  question,  in -repeated  instances  of  care- 
ful practical  experiment ;  and  I  can  affirm  that  this  is  so  with  whatever 
animal  it  may  be  attempted. 

The  attention  of  Mr.  Darwin  was  called  to  this  fact  through  certain  results 


SELECTION  AND  MATING.  117 

c 

of  experiments  tried  by  Messieurs  Corbie  and  Botard,  with  pigeons  —  and  he 
adds,  "  I  was  thus  led  to  make  my  experiments  with  foivls.  I  selected  long- 
established,  pure  breeds,  in  which  there  was  not  a  known  trace  of  red  (in 
their  color),  yet,  in  several  of  the  progeny,  feathers  of  this  color  appeared. 
One  magnificent  bird,  the  offspring  of  a  Black  Spanish  cock,  and  a  White 
Silky  hen,  came  colored  almost  exactly  like  the  wild  Bankiva  cock.  Now, 
all  who  know  anything  of  the  breeding  of  poultry,  know  that  tens  of  thou- 
sands of  pure  Black  Spanish,  and  of  pure  White  Silky  fowls  have  been 
reared,  without  the  appearance  of  a  red  feather." 

Mr.  Tegetmeier  speaks  of  the  frequent  appearance,  in  crossed  fowls,  of  pen- 
cilled, or  transversely-barred  feathers,  like  those  common  to  many  gallina- 
ceous birds,  the  Chinese  varieties,  notably,  as  being  apparently  an  instance 
of  reversion  to  a  characteristic  in  color,  formerly  possessed  by  some  ancient 
progenitor  of  the  family.  The  so-called  "  Himalayan  "  rabbit  is  of  a  snow- 
white  body,  with  black  ears,  nose,  tail,  and  feet ;  and  it  reproduces  its  like 
perfectly  true.  Yet  this  race  is  known  to  have  been  formed  by  a  union  of 
two  varieties  of  silver-gray  rabbits.  Now,  if  the  Himalayan  doe  be  crossed 
with  a  sandy-colored  buck,  a  silver-gray  rabbit  is  the  product ;  which  is  evi- 
dently another  case  of  reversion  to  one  of  the  original  parent  varieties. 

In  the  case  of 'poultry,  take  our  quite  modern  "  Plymouth  Bock  M  variety, 
which  the  latest  American  Standard  recognizes  as  "  a  breed."  We  know 
where  and  when  this  "  breed  "  (or  cross),  was  originated ;  and,  perhaps  the 
best  specimens  we  see,  are  those  produced  in  Connecticut,  from  a  union  of 
the  Black  Java  with  the  Dominique  bird.  Both  these  original  fowls  breed 
their  like  in  their  purity,  very  accurately,  as  is  well  known  —  and  the  so- 
called  "Plymouth  Bocks,"  produced  in  this  way,  from  the  union  of  the 
original  strong  blood  mentioned,  prove  very  uniformly,  good-colored  specimens. 
The  progeny,  however,  bred  together,  come  imperfect  in  color,  and  undecided 
in  markings  of  plumage,  at  once ;  "  throwing  back,"  naturally  to  the  Black 
Java,  or  clear  Dominique  in  color,  in  greater  or  less  degree,  an*d  inevitably. 
And  the  progeny  of  this  cross  continued  to  be  bred  "  in-and-in,"  however 
cautiously  we  may  make,  our  selections,  can  never  be  bred  satisfactorily  to 
produce  in  succession  the  color,  at  all  uniform,  which  the  first  product  of  the 
pure  Java  and  the  Dominique  gives.  This  is  a  prime  law  of  Nature,  and  it 
cannot  be  changed. 


118 


THE  CHINA  FOWL. 


The  accompanying  cut  portrays  a  recent  ideal  specimen  of  what  is  called 
the  Felch  strain  of  the  Chamberlin  stock.  This  picture  represents  a  young 
cock,  with  very  dark  pencilled  neck-hackles,  of  good  depth,  well  up  on  the 
legs,  full  breasted,  and  of  tasteful  shape  and  carriage.  Mr.  Felch  says,  they 
have  been  called  the  "pouter-pigeon  strain.'7  I  do  not  see  the  aptness  of  the 
title.     This  cock  is  a  well-modelled  bird,  but  the  picture  is  again  a  "  fancy  " 

design.  Not  one  sample,  surely,  in 
a  hundred  can  be  produced,  so  per- 
fect in  symmetry  as  this  delineation 
indicates ;  though,  perhaps,  such 
methodical  breeders  as  Messrs. 
Felch  may  occasionally  find  among 
theirs  a  single  cock  that  would  ap- 
proach this  figure,  in  comeliness. 

The  "  pencilled  "  feathering  upon 
the  Brahmas,  light  or  dark,  and  the 
same  characteristic  observable  in 
the  different  colored  Cochins  of  the 
present  day,  is  one  of  the  most 
marked  and  invariable  points  in 
the  plumage  of  this  race  that  it 
possesses.  And  no  one  who  has 
bred  any  variety  of  these  Chinese 
fowls,  but  will  have  observed  that 
this  conformation  is  universally 
prevalent,  in  some  degree  of  devel- 
opment, upon  every  specimen  pro- 
duced, from  whatever  "  strain  "  or 
stock  the  fancier  may  chance  to  possess,  either  in  this  country,  or  in 
Great  Britain.  This  "  pencilling  "  of  clear  white  and  black  was  a  notable 
characteristic  in  the  plumage  of  the  original  Shanghaes,  of  my  own  im- 
portations, of  all  colors,  and  especially  on  the  Light  and  Dark  Brahmas.  It 
is  seen  to-day,  in  every  instance,  more  or  less  prominently,  in  the  progeny 
of  these  importations,  wherever  this  stock  is  bred;  and  the  so-claimed 
Chamberlin-Cornish   variety   exhibits   it,    invariably.      The   Partridge    and 


•  DARK-HACKLED   "LIGHT  BRAHMA"  COCKEREL. 


SELECTION  AND  MATING.  119 

Grouse  Cochins  show  this  feature  as  perfectly  as  do  any  variety,  however 
dark  or  light  their  body-plumage  otherwise  may  be.  In  any  and  every  cross 
made  with  these  varieties  upon  other  pure  breeds  —  say  with  the  Dorking, 
the  Black  Spanish,  the  Leghorn,  or  otherwise,  the  "pencilled"  hackle,  or 
saddle-feathering,  will  inevitably  show  itself ;  and  this  marking  can  never  be 
bred  out  of  stock  into  which  it  has  once  been  introduced. 

In  mating  for  breeding  birds  of  anj^  particular  caste  of  plumage,  with  these 
varieties  —  that  is  to  say,  of  lighter  and  darker  pluming,  or  darker  or 
lighter  hackle-feather,  it  is  necessary  towards  the  production  of  a  particular 
style  of  feathering,  first  to  select  such  birds  as  you  may  have  some  knowl- 
edge of,  that  are  fairly  established  in  their  color  in  a  general  way.  From 
such  strain  or  variety,  secondly,  it  is  requisite  that  you  choose  birds  (to 
furnish  you  with  the  desired  colored  progeny),  that  are  properly  marked  in 
one  way  for  males,  and  in  another  way  for  females.  And  this  is  a  nice  un- 
dertaking, altogether. 

Still,  the  experiment  is  an  exceedingly  interesting  operation.  For  the 
show-room,  to  win  in  competition,  your  standard  requires,  for  example,  with . 
Light  Brahmas,  that  the  cock  shall  be  of  good  weight,  not  less  than  12  lbs., 
or  the  cockerel  not  less  than  10  lbs.,  the  hen  10  to  11  lbs.,  and  the  pullet  8  to 
10  lbs.  This  variety  must  have  the  pea-comb,  firm  and  straight;  the  cock's 
head  broad  and  straight ;  neck  long,  well  arched,  and  pencilling  on  hackles  dis- 
tinctly marked  ;  body  plumage  clean  white  and  black;  fluff  rich  and  soft,  and 
heavily  feathered  legs,  without  "  hock-feathers,"  &c.  The  hen  must  be  similar 
in  color,  with  the  pencilling  of  the  neck  flowing  well  down  to  the  shoulders, 
and  clearly  defined.  Now  it  is  desirable  to  produce  these  show-birds  as  near 
to  perfection  as  it  is  possible  to  attain,  and  the  younger  fancier  is  desirous 
to  know  how  he  shall  accomplish  this. 

As  I  have  said,  this  is  not  easy  to  compass.  It  can  result  only  through 
careful  manipulation,  and  it  does  not  usually  occur  without  repeated  experi- 
ments; though,  with  proper  caution,  and  the  exercise  of  fair  common  sense, 
the  chances  are  in  favor  of  a  successful  result,  at  any  time.  I  have  bred  a 
great  many  birds,  and  I  have  been  often  disappointed  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
I  have  frequently  realized  extraordinary  success,  when  I  least  expected  it,  in 
my  experimental  experience. 

I  have  found,  as  a  good  general  rule,  with  the  Light  Brahmas,  in  order  to 


120 


THE   CHINA  FOWL. 


^ 


ENGLISH  PRIZE    "  LIGHT  BRAHMA  "    HEN,   TWO  YEARS  OLD,   1872,   73. 


SELECT  101T  AND  MATING. 


121 


=^V* 


ENGLISH  PRIZE  "LIGHT  BRAHMA"  COCK,  2  YEARS  OLD,   1872,  73. 


122  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

breed  a  majority  of  the  beautiful,  so  much  admired,  medium-pencilled-necked 
pullets,  in  a  given  number  of  chickens,  that  a  good  vigorous  ten  and  a  half  to 
eleven  pound  light  hackled  cock,  see  p.  115,  at  head  of  this  chapter,  short- 
legged,  fully  feathered  on  shank  to  the  toes,  with  head  well  up,  generous 
wattles,  short  full  inclining  (not  upright)  tail,  square  body,  and  flat  saddle, 
coupled  with  longish-legged  hens  (or  pullets)  of  pure  white  bodies,  black 
tipped  lower  wing  feathers,  clear  black  short  tail,  good  fluffy  thighs,  heavily 
feathered  shanks  to  the  toes,  small  head  and  wattle,  and  a  distinct,  full,  well 
defined  neck-hackle  quite  dark  and  even  in  "pencilling,"  are  the  best  to  mate 
in  male  and  females,  for  the  average  production  of  these  desirably  plumed 
pullets.  This  union  will  give  you  more  rich  medium-pencilled  evenly 
hackled  pullets  than  otherwise.  The  cocks  that  eventuate  from  such  a  union 
will  not  all  be  what  you  desire.  And,  if  you  wish  to  breed  the  more  perfect 
hue  of  male  birds,  I  recommend  the  reverse  of  this  plan,  in  the  parent  stock. 
The  hens  may  be  lighter  neck-hackled,  and  the  parent-cock  should  be  full 
dark-necked,  with  the  other  characteristics  as  above  described. 

If  the  back  quarters  of  the  saddle-hackles  have  the  slightest  tinge  of  palest 
straw-color  splashed  through  the  white  depending  mass,  upon  the  breeding- 
cocks,  I  have  found  it  no  objection.  My  original  cocks  both  carried  this 
feathering  upon  the  rear  saddles;  and  I  have  found  that  this  creamy  tint  in 
the  male,  at  this  point,  gave  me  more  evenly  colored  young  cocks  than  when 
bred  from  those  having  the  blank  white  hackling,  en  masse,  at  this  extremity 
of  the  long  back  feathers. 

We  present  on  pages  120  and  121  two  spirited  pictures  of  representative 
English-bred  Light  Brahmas,  drawn  by  Harrison  Weir  of  London ;  a  mature 
cock  and  hen.  The  male  bird  is  not  the  style  of  Light  Brahma  we  fancy  in 
this  country,  however,  and  we  give  place  to  the  drawing  simply  for  purposes 
of  comparison.  Such  a  tail  or  rump  as  this  upon  a  "Brahma"  cock,  in  an 
American  exhibition  room,  would  disqualify  the  bird  at  sight,  in  the  opinion 
of  a  competent  judge  of  this  variety  of  fowl,  whatever  other  good  points  he 
might  possess.  While,  for  breeding  purposes,  he  wouldn't  be  worth  a  shilling 
in  a  Yankee  fancier's  yard.  His  legs  are  too  short,  also,  and  his  neck  is  simi- 
larly faulty.  There  is  the  evident  presence  of  blood  "foreign"  to  the  true 
American  Brahma  in  this  cock's  composition,  and  an  unmistakable  mixture 
of  the  big-tailed,  squatty  white  Dorking  in  his  figure. 


SELECTION  AND  MATING.  123 

Yet  this  is  a  fair  type  of  many  of  the  English  Brahmas  bred  in  1872  to 
1874.  The  hen  is  better,  but  her  legs  are  too  short  for  her  large-framed  body ; 
her  neck  is  similarly  objectionable ;  the  head  of  both  cock  and  hen  are  by  far 
too  coarse  for  a  first-class  thorough-bred  Light  Brahma,  as  we  produce  them 
now  in  this  country;  and  both  partake  too  strongly  of  the  pattern  of  the  duck- 
legged,  clumsy,  badly-bred  modern  English  "  Cochin,"  of  late  years  frequent- 
ly to  be  met  with  among  the  "  importations  "  from  Great  Britain,  from  unre- 
liable sources ;  of  which  latter  variety  we  have  seen  several  samples  that  have 
been  got  out  at  high  cost,  which  exhibited  unmistakable  evidence  of  the  ad- 
mixture in  their  breeding  of  the  gray  Dorking  blood,  more  especially  observ- 
able, too,  in  some  of  the  later  Dark  Brahmas  received  here  from  England 
in  recent  years. 

Upon  page  126  may  also  be  found  a  fine  drawing  by  this  same  English 
artist,  of  a  young  Light  Brahma  pullet  at  .ten  months  old,  whose  general 
form,  in  this  instance,  for  her  age,  is  very  much  more  like  what  is  deemed 
in  the  United  States  about  the  thing;  though  it  will  be  said  by  close  breed- 
ers, familiar  with  the  nice  points  in  this  variety,  that  the  shanks  of  this 
young  fowl  are  rather  long  in  proportion  to  the  body.  The  pullet,  in  this 
respect,  we  do  not  think  could  be  so  greatly  improved.  To  produce  good  pul- 
lets, we  have  found  it  indispensable  that  the  parent  hens  bred  from  must 
be  longish-legged.  The  cock  delineated  on  page  125  is,  to  be  sure,  pretty  well 
"up  in  the  world."  But  he  is  a  young  bird,  and  the  form  will  naturally  set- 
tle down  considerably  with  age.  If  his  limbs  were  a  trifle  shorter,  we  should 
like  him  better.  In  color  and  pencilling  both  these  specimens  are  fine, 
though  they  would  not  answer  to  mate,  if  the  owner  desired  to  reproduce 
likenesses  of  this  pair.  For  average  chickens  marked  like  these,  this  cock 
should  be  bred  to  darker-hackled  hens ;  and  a  pullet  marked  as  this  is,  would 
be  better  mated,  for  breeding,  to  a  much  lighter-necked  cock.  In  the  show- 
pen,  however,  such  a  pair  of  ten-months'  old  birds  as  these  "  portraits  "  rep- 
resent, are  seldom  seen ;  but  when  found  together,  they  are  pretty  sure  to 
win,  with  average  fair  judges  at  exhibitions. 

I  am  aware  of  the  opinions  of  other  breeders  upon  this  subject,  who  differ 
with  me ;  but  I  speak  from  my  own  experience  in  the  matter  of  the  prepon- 
derating influence  of  the  male  in  poultry-producing.  The  impress  of  the  cock 
upon  the  progeny  is  much  more  remarkable,  within  my  knowledge,  than  that 


124  .  THE  CHINA  FOWL, 

of  the  hens,  in  all  varieties  of  fowl.  I  incline  to  this  opinion  from  the  existence 
of  one  important  fact ;  and  that  is,  that  the  male  bird  is  alone  in  his  harem  usu- 
ally. His  "  life-principle  "  is  distributed  among  a  flock  of  a  dozen  females,  or 
less.  They  are  constantly  in  his  company.  They  meet  with  no  other  male 
birds  (I  am  now  speaking  of  close,  clean  breeding)  ;  and  the  stamp  of  this 
one  male  operates  to  reproduce  among  his  wives,  as  a  rule,  a  likeness  of  him- 
self, naturally.  The  power,  mettle,  greater  strength,  and  sturdier  character- 
istics of  the  male,  are  thus  brought  to  bear,  of  themselves,  directly  upon  one 
point ;  and  his  mates  being  continually  with  him,  and  him  only,  for  the  time 
being,  as  naturally  "  reflect  his  image  "  in  form,  color,  and  points  (in  the 
main)  in  their  progeny. 

A  writer  in  "  The  Poultry  World  "  says  to  another,  "  The  cause  of  a  second 
litter  of  chicks  resembling  the  Houdan  cock"  (which  had  been  allowed  to 
run  with  Light  Brahma  hens  a  few  days,  carelessly,  but  which  was  then 
taken  away,  and  a  Light  Brahma  cock  substituted),  "  is  explained  by  a  nat- 
ural law  well  known  to  breeders ;  viz.,  that,  when  a  hen  is  pregnant  to  a  cock 
of  a  different  breed,  she  is  a  cross  ever  after,  the  purity  of  her  blood  being 
lost  in  consequence  of  her  connection  with  a  cock  of  foreign  blood.  She  is 
then  a  cross  forever,  and  cannot  produce  a  pure  chick  of  any  breed.  This 
law  is  applicable  to  all  our  domestic  animals."  This  is  to  the  point ;  and  it 
will  so  operate,  in  every  instance,  with  fowls,  sooner  or  later,  in  all  cases 
where  a  cock  of  a  different  breed  or  color  is  even  permitted  once  to  associate 
with  such  other  variety  of  hens;  thus  showing  the  immense  preponderance 
of  influence  of  the  male  over  that  of  the  female,  for  breeding  to  either  color 
or  points. 

I  have  in  my  mind  at  this  moment  the  theory  of  a  well-known  Light 
Brahma  breeder,  who  has  produced  a  great  many  fine  birds,  who  contends 
that  this  matter  of  crossing  a  fowl  temporarily  does  it  no  injury  as  to  the  fu- 
ture pure  breeding  of  the  birds.  This  same  gentleman  is  a  stickler  for  "  pedi- 
gree fowl  stock,"  too,  about  which  he  writes  fluently.  His  notion  is,  in  brief, 
that  "  there  is  no  union  of  circulation  between  the  embryo-chick  and  the  hen- 
mother;"  that  is,  between  the  egg  and  the  layer  of  it,  I  suppose  :  and  there- 
fore this  principle  is  not,  in  his  opinion,  analogous  m  poultry  to  the  relations 
existing  between  the  mother-animal  and  her  progeny.  But  I  do  not  see  the 
force  of  this  position ;  and  I  feel  very  confident,  that,  whatever  may  be  the 


SELECTION  AND  MATING. 


125 


published  arguments  of  this  breeder  regarding  his  notions  on  this  subject,  he 
would  not  run  the  risk  of  thus  permitting  any  of  his  breeding-hens  to  be  ap- 
proached, for  a  single  interview,  by  a  strange  cock,  particularly  of  a  different 
color  or  variety  to  that  of  his  selected  Light  Brahma  pedigreed  males,  with 
any  hope  that  he  could  ever  retrieve  his  favorite  female  birds  from  the  certain 
contamination  that  would  succeed  such  "temporary  union."  It  is  one  thing, 
to  preach,  and  quite  another  to  prac- 
tice. And  I  am  quite  sure  this  gen- 
tleman, who  writes  so  cleverly  upon 
this  point,  is  too  skilful  a  breeder 
ever  to  venture  upon  the  fallacy  I 
have  hinted  at,  so  long  as  he  under- 
takes to  produce,  and  sell  for  genu- 
ine, any  "  pedigree  Brahmas." 

The  annexed  illustration  repre- 
sents a  model  young  cock  of  the 
so-called  Cornish-Chamberlin  strain 
of  "  Light  Brahmas,"  which  Mr.  C. 
C.  Plaisted  of  Connecticut  states,  in 
August,  1874,  he  has  been  breeding 
from  during  the  present  season. 
Having  examined  Mr.  Plaisted's 
stock  in  his  runs  this  summer,  I  am 
constrained  to  say  that  this  picture 
does  not  do  his  fine  birds  justice,  at 
all.  But  this  cut  is  put  forth  to 
represent  his  "Chainberlin  strain," 
as  he  has  perfected  it,  after  breeding 
this  same  stock  steadily  for  some  twenty  years,  so  he  affirms.  The  reader 
can  judge,  by  referring  to  other  authentic  drawings  in  this  volume,  how 
nearly  this  strain  (from  the  delineations  given  by  different  artists)  is  like  my 
original  Light  Grays,  and  Dr.  Bennett's,  as  portrayed  in  1850,  '51,  '52,  on 
pages  67,  69,  and  137,  138.  In  this  upright,  long,  rangy  outline,  the  dis- 
tinction (if  there  be  any)  presents  but  the  slightest  difference,  to  our  eye. 
And  this  portrait  in  1874  only  goes  to  confirm  my  early  and  "  chronic " 


126 


THE   CHINA   FOWL. 


A   GOOD  TYPE  OF  MODERN  LIGHT  BRAHMA  PULLET,   10  MONTHS  OLD, 

As  bred  in  the  Uniled  States,  in  the  last  seven  years. 


SELECTION  AND  MATING.  127 

opinion,  that  all  this  stock  comes  from  the  same  original  parentage,  —  to  wit, 
my  first  two  lots  of  "  Gray  Shanghaes,"  of  1849  and  '50.* 

Upon  the  subject  of  the  point  in  Brahmas  known  as  the  pea-comb,  —  which 
fowls  of  both  colors  and  sexes  must  nowadays  have  nicely  developed  to  qualify 
them  to  compete  in  the  show-rooms,  —  I  have  to  say  that  this  peculiar  forma- 
tion was  also  original  in  America,  and  that  Dr.  John  C.  Bennett  thus  named 
it  at  an  early  day.  And  below  I  give  an  extract  from  an  article  furnished 
by  me  to  "  The  London  Poultry  Review,"  in  the  spring  of  1874 :  ■ — 

"I  will  briefly  refer  in  this  paper  to  a  peculiar  characteristic  of  this  race 
of  poultry,  which  has  been  the  cause  of  much  discussion  j  and  that  is  the  pea- 
comb  of  the  Brahmas.  One  English  writer  says,  '  The  only  difficult  point 
with  the  Brahmas  is  their  variety  of  comb.'  Another  asserts  that  'the  pea- 
combed  Brahma  cannot  be  a  Shanghae  fowl.'  Well,  let  us  see  about  this. 
A  third  adds,  i  If  it  be  so,  and  if  Brother  Jonathan  made  it,  I  wish  he  would 
make  us  something  more.'  That  Brother  Jonathan  did  make  the  pea-comb 
originally,  nobody  questions.  That  Dr.  Bennett  gave  this  comb  its  name,  we 
all  know. 

"He  called  my  attention  to  this  peculiarity  the  year  after  I  received  my 
second  lot  of  Grays  from  Shanghae  direct ;  and,  though  we  all  bred  both 
single  and  pea-comb  Brahmas  for  years  afterwards,  this  feature  originated 
with  my  stock.  And  not  until  the  third  or  fourth  year  after  its  first  discov- 
ery, did  we  undertake  to  breed  the  pea-comb,  uniformly.     The  first  birds  you 

*  In  regard  to  the  names  "  Gray  Shanghae  "  and  "  Chittagong,"  it  may  be  well  to  state,  at  this 
point,  as  to  the  origin  of  my  first  pair  of  Grays,  that  some  persons  appear  to  have  got  the  impres- 
sion that  these  two  identical  birds  were  "  imported  from  Shanghae."  I  have  always  stated  very 
clearly  that  this  pair  were  obtained  by  me  from  Dr.  J.  J.  Kerr  of  Philadelphia,  who  wrote  me  Sep- 
tember 3,  1849,  that,  "although  they  were  then  called  4  Chittagongs,'  they  came  out  of  Chinese 
stock,  and  were  bred  from  birds  imported  from  Shanghae,  into  Pennsylvania."  Hence  I  called 
them  "  Gray  Shanghaes,"  after  getting  my  second  lot  of  lighter-colored  Grays  through  Mr.  Porter 
of  New  York,  in  1850.  Mr.  Cornish,  Mr.  Chamberlin,  Mr.  Hatch,  Dr.  Kerr,  Dr.  Bennett,  Mr. 
George,  and  myself  called  all  this  light  gray  stock  "■  Chittagong  "  at  first;  and  none  of  us  knew 
any  thing  about  different  "  strains  "  (if  any  ever  existed)  until  the  "  Brahma  Pootra"  title  began 
to  be  bruited,  in  1851,  '52.  I  never  heard  that  anybody  pretended  that  the  original  Dr.  Kerr  pair 
had  a  history  apart  from  this;  viz.,  that  they  were  the  only  light  gray  fowls  then  known,  of  thi5 
class  of  birds,  and  that  they  were  bred  out  of  stock  imported  into  Pennsylvania,  from  China,  some 
two  years  before  I  received  them;  the  color  of  which  imported  parent  stock  I  never  inquired  about, 
nor  do  I  now  know  whether  it  was  originally  black,  white,  or  blue.  And  I  have  never  yet  deemed 
this  to  be  of  the  slightest  consequence,  since  I  know  how  perfectly  in  color  these  Grays  have  bred, 
from  1849  and  '50  down  to  the  present  day.  —  G.  P.  B. 


128  THE  CHINA   FOWL. 

had  in  England  were  mostly  single-combed ;  and  to-day,  in  our  best  yards, 
we  occasionally  meet  with,  fine  Light  Brahmas  having  the  single  comb.  But 
these  latter  are  thus  disqualified  for  exhibition,  at  the  present  time. 

"Now  I  propose  to  give  you  ' something  more'  akin  to  what  the  writer 
alludes  to  above,  in  the  way  of  pea-comb.  The  Dark  Brahmas,  as  well  as 
the  Light  variety,  must  have  the  pea-comb  to  make  them  pass  muster  with 
the  judges  at  the  shows,  as  we  are  all  now  aware.  And  why?,  Because 
everybody  is  satisfied  that  this  style  is  the  best  for  cold  climates,  the  pretti- 
est, the  neatest  head-ornament  for  a  large  fowl  of  either  sex,  and,  more  espe- 
cially, because  it  is  a  peculiarity  of  the  Brahmas,  and  no  other  fowl  carries  it. 
1  It  is  a  distinguishing  mark  of  the  purity  of  this  variety,'  writes  one  enthu- 
siastic gentleman.  Another  (in  Tegetmeier's  last  edition)  says,  'Mr.  Burn- 
ham  declares  they  are  Shanghaes  (Cochins  now).  If  they  are  Shanghaes, 
will  the  advocates  of  this  opinion  tell  me  if  they  ever  bred  Buffs,  Cinnamons, 
or  Grouse,  with  pea-combs?'  And  this  brings  me  to  the  point  I  am  about 
to  present,  in  direct  reply  to  this  gentleman. 

"For  four  years  past,  I  have  been  watching  this  very  thing,  in  its  perfect 
development,  in  both  the  Grouse  and  Partridge  Cochins  in  this  town  [Mel- 
rose]. A  very  careful  breeder  discovered  amongst  his  Partridge  Cochins  (four 
years  ago)  a  few  chickens,  cocks  and  pullets,  clearly  marked  with  this  pea- 
comb.  He  could  not  account  for  it.  He  had  only  this  breed  on  his  premises. 
He  has  never  had  any  others  since.  He  has  bred  from  the  pea-comb  birds 
only,  selected  them  the  second  year,  then  culled  them  the  third;  and  the 
fourth  season  he  put  into  the  Massachusetts  show  (in  1874)  several  cages  of  as 
perfect  pea-combed  Partridge  Cochins  as  ever  were  grown.  Nobody  else  that  I 
ever  saw  has  this  variety.  From  seventy-five  to  a  hundred  —  old  and  young 
—  may  now  be  seen  in  this  gentleman's  yards,  fully  developed  with  this 
'peculiarity  of  the  Brahmas.' 

"They  are  not  a  cross.  Never  a  taint  of  cross  in  any  of  them.  The  ori- 
ginal stock  came  out  of  eggs  laid  by  a  Shanghae  hen  purchased  from  on  ship- 
board. And  there  they  are,  to  speak  for  themselves,  precisely  as  the  pea-comb 
was  originally  developed  upon  my  imported  Gray  Shanghaes  (or  Brahmas) 
the  second  year  I  bred  them,  —  accurate  likenesses  of  which  choice  birds  will  be 
found  upon  pages  143, 153.  This  gentleman  has  not  yet  sold  any  fowls,  and  de- 
clines to  do  so.  But  he  has  got  them,  of  all  ages  ;  and  they  are  true  pea-combed 
Partridge  fowls.    What  becomes  of  Mr.  Wright's  theory  on  this  subject,  if  this 


SELECTION  AND  MATING.  129 

is  established  in  the  Partridge,  as  we  all  know  it  now  is,  fairly,  in  the  Brah- 
mas?  And  why,  as  in  the  instance  of  the  Brahmas,  is  not  this  a  most  valu- 
able acquisition  ? 

"  Mr.  Wright  has  contributed  to  poultry  literature  a  vast  amount  of  plausi- 
ble and  solid  material ;  and  usually  he  writes  clearly  and  well.  But  the  facts 
I  have  herein  set  down  are  at  variance  with  much  which  this  author  has 
penned ;  and  they  dispose  effectually  of  the  theory  suggested  by  the  other 
English  writer  upon  Brahmas,  who  triumphantly  argues  in  his  query,  ( Will 
the  advocates  of  this  [my]  opinion  tell  me  if  they  have  ever  bred  Grouse 
Cochins  (Shanghaes)  with  pea-combs  ? '  since  the  fancier  I  speak  of  has 
this  year  got  out  forty  chickens,  all  pea-combed,  from  his  stock ;  whilst 
a  quartette  of  his  year-old  stock,  placed  in  the  hands  of  another  person  in 
Norfolk  County,  Massachusetts,  have  produced  sixty  more  chickens  in  March 
and  April,  1874,  perfectly  marked  with  this  peculiar  "  pea  "  comb. 

"  I  conclude  this  too  lengthy  article  with  these  final  assertions.  No  so- 
called  Brahma  fowls  ever  came  from  India  in  1846,  or  at  any  other  time,  to 
America,  /originated  these  fowls,  now  called  Brahmas.  I  sent  to  England 
the  first  Light  and  Dark  purely-bred  Brahma  birds  you  ever  had  there  (as 
1  Gray  Shanghaes '),  or  they  went  hence  from  my  stock.  And,  lastly,  the  pea- 
comb  has  been  established  in  America  upon  the  Grouse  or  Partridge  Cochins, 
as  I  have  now  informed  you.  And  Brother  Jonathan  hasn't  yet  done  with 
improving  domestic  poultry,  as  I  trust  we  shall  show  in  the  future." 

In  those  earliest  days,  the  "  fine  points  "  upon  our  imported  stock  of  Shang- 
haes were  not  appreciated  by  us.  This  pea-comb  question  was  long  a  debat- 
able one.  Dr.  Bennett  claimed,  for  years  after  we  discovered  this  peculiar 
formation,  —  which  he  first  pointed  out  to  me  in  my  yards,  — that  the  single 
comb  was  the  true  one  for  the  Brahmas,  though  the  deviation  of  this  "  pea- 
comb"  (to  which  he  gave  this  name,  from  its  similarity  in  shape  to  a  half- 
blown  pea-blossom),  he  said  sometimes  occurred  with  this  fowl.  He  didn't 
know  whether  it  did,  or  not  —  when  this  opinion  was'  given  I  Nor  did  any 
one  else  know,  at  that  time.  The  appearance  and  final  perfecting  of  this 
feature  of  the  pea-comb  upon  our  Gray  birds  was  a  surprise  to  us  all ;  and  a 
deal  of  labor  followed,  to  establish  it.  It  required  several  years  of  experiment 
and  care  to  produce  this  head-ornament  with  any  great  degree  of  uniformity 
or  success,  as  I  have  shown  in  the  quoted  opinions  of  all  the  original  breeders 
of  this  stock,  possessing  any  nominal  strain.     The  Queen's  birds  were  single- 


130  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

combed,  so  far  as  I  remember.  Dr.  Gwynne's  early  fowls  were,  seven-tenths 
of  them,  single-combed  ;  and  these  he  received  from  Bennett  and  Plaisted,  who 
bred  the  Cornish-Chamberlin  strain  (so  Mr.  Plaisted  says),  and  the  Burnham 
strain  (so  Dr.  Bennett  says)  ;  see  pages  80  to  85,  for  these  authoritative  State- 
ments. And  even  up  to  this  day,  more  or  less  of  the  Light  Brahmas  are  bred, 
of  anybody's  stock,  in  any  man's  yards,  with  the  up-right,  single,  serrated 
comb  that  Bennett  claimed,  at  first,  was  the  proper  style  of  comb  for  this  breed. 

Even  Cornish  himself  says  (in  1869  !)  "  I  did  notice  the  l  pea-comb  '  on  my 
birds.  It  was  not  so  with  all."  He  does  not  say  anything  about  this  peculiar 
formation  in  his  first  account,  dated  March  2, 1852,  I  observe  !  And  yet,  ac- 
cording to  his  last  "  accurate  "  statement,  he  must  then  (in  1852)  have  had 
these  birds  in  his  possession  (from  September,  1846)  fully  six  years !  Did  he 
"notice  this  pea-comb  "  on  his  birds  before  he  wrote  that  first  letter  ?  If  so, 
why  was  this  peculiarity  not  mentioned  by  him  ?  It  certainly  was  a  most  ex- 
traordinary development !  Nobody  in  America  or  England  knew  anything 
what  this  rare  feature  meant.  Tegetmeier  writes,  as  late  as  1867,  "  this  pea- 
comb  was  a  great  novelty  with  us  in  England."  Another  English  writer  then 
says,  "  in  all  our  crosses,  we  have  never  met  with  anything  like  this  ! "  I  do 
not  remember  myself  to  have  observed  it  till  my  second  year  of  breeding  with 
the  second  lot  of  Grays  I  obtained  from  Shanghae,  via  New  York.  It  was  a 
curious  discovery,  and  it  is  decidedly  a  very  desirable  thing  to  breed  as  many 
pea-combed  birds  among  our  Brahmas  as  possible.  But  the  single  comb  will 
appear,  more  or  less,  with  the  best  families  to-day,  nevertheless. 

This  same  Dr.  Gwynne,  whom  Bennett,  Tegetmeier,  Plaisted,  Burnham, 
Wright,  and  Miss  Watts,  all  agree  contributed  one  of  the  two  first  pens  of 
Light  Brahmas  shown  at  Birmingham,  England,  and  who  himself  declares, 
in  Bev.  Mr.  Wingfield's  London  work,  "  I  received  from  Dr.  Bennett  of  the 
United  States,  in  1853,  five  pairs  of  these  Cornish-Chamberlin  fowls,  —  three 
only  of  which  had  the  pea-comb,"  also,  subsequently  adds,  regarding  the 
Brahma  pea-comb  question,  "All  /  can  say  on  this  point  is,  that  out  of 
twenty  chickens  bred  for  myself  out  of  three  of  the  ten  birds  received  from 
Dr.  Bennett  of  the  United  States,  I  cannot  detect  a  single  'deviation'  among 
them  from  the  single  comb  of  the  parents."  And  yet  it  is  claimed  by  Lewis 
Wright  that  "  this  pea-comb  alone  is  absolute  evidence  of  the  antiquity  and 
purity  of  the  Cornish-Bennett  fowls  over  Burnham's  mongrels  !  " 

In  mating  the  Buff,  the  White,  or  the  Black  Cochins,  there  are  no  such 


PEA -COMBED    PAKTUIDGE    CoCHIN    (JOCK,  2    YEARS    OLD   1874. 
From  the  original  stock  of  C.  H.  Edmonds,  Melrose,  Mass. 


SELECTION  AND   MATING.  133 

requirements  as  I  have  described,  inasmuch  as  there  is  but  one  general 
color,  each  to  be  sought  for  in  these  different  varieties.  But  with  the  Partridge 
Cochins,  the  pencilling  of  the  neck  and  back-hackles  and  the  markings  of  the 
body-feathering,  as  in  the  Dark  Brahmas  also,  comes  a  nice  point  again, 
in  mating  for  breeding,  to  produce  the  desired  fashionable  u Standard" 
specimens  of  fowls. 

The  Partridge  Cochins,  and  the  Grouse  Cochins  are  very  similar  in  general 
hue,  both  being  of  a  rich  deep  brown,  with  similar  markings  and  pencil- 
lings  ;  except  that  one  is  of  a  reddish  tinge  (in  the  lighter  plumage),  and  the 
other  golden  bay,  or  a  deep  orange  tint,  in  the  more  brilliant  parts  of  the  gen- 
eral ground-feathering  in  the  hens.  The  colors  of  the  Partridge  or  the  Grouse 
cock  (of  the  most  acceptable  character),  are  but  slightly  different  in  each. 
Those  tints  that  are  best  understood  as  applicable  to  the  superb  "  black  and 
red  Game  Cock,"  are  in  the  main  the  most  desirable.  The  breast,  thighs,  and 
under  body-color  of  the  male  Partridge  Cochin  should  be  clear  black,  to  accord 
with  the  "Standard"  requirement.  Tail  and  base-feathers,  metallic  black. 
Hackles  "  pencilled,"  orange  and  black,  &c.     These  for  the  show-birds. 

But,  formating  to  breed- theva,  the  presence  of  brown  feathers  sparsely  inter- 
spersed upon  the  breast,  flanks,  and  thighs,  is  (in  my  experience)  the  better 
indication  towards  producing  finely  marked  pullet  chicks.  And  I  have  found, 
in  a  large  majority  of  cases,  that  a  good,  vigorous,  well  formed  two  year-old 
cock,  with  this  style  of  marking,  would  throw  finer  pullets  than  the  dead- 
black  breasted  birds.  But  to  breed  the  others  (cock  chicks),  the  black 
breasted  male,  and  the  darkest  brown  hens  are  the  best,  of  course ;  and  all 
these,  I  repeat  it,  are  nice  points,  resulting  satisfactorily  only  through  careful 
studied  experiment,  oftentimes  necessarily  long  continued.  And  here  it  is 
that  the  theory  of  "constant  selection'''1  of  the  best  birds  in  your  breeding 
stock  comes  in,  pertinently. 

I  understand  perfectly  well  that  this  principle  is  a  good,  if  not  the  true 
method.  In  all  cases,  whatever  the  opinions  or  experience  of  the  fancier 
may  be,  the  successful  breeder  resorts  to  this  mode  in  his  breeding.  I  wouldn't 
give  a  row  of  pins,  for  example,  for  a  Cochin  or  Brahma  cock-bird,  to  breed 
from,  that  turned  the  scales,  in  weight,  at  over  twelve  pounds.  I  prefer  one 
at  eleven  pounds,  even;  provided  he  be  "well  up  on  his  pins,"  courageous, 
healthy,  well  pointed,  not  leggy,  squarely  framed  for  a  Cochin,  and  perhaps 
a  little  more  "  rangy  "  in  form  for  a  Brahma.     And  I  prefer  my  pullets,  or 


134  THE   CHINA   FOWL. 

hens,  in  proportion  higher  on  the  leg  considerably,  to  be  mated  to  such 
cocks.  Both  should  be  well  marked  in  plumage,  as  I  have  described  ;  and 
all  should  be  kept  in  "high  condition,"  without  permitting  them  to  get  fat 
while  being  bred.  With  such  birds,  of  good  stock,  you  may  count  on  very 
good  chickens  in  the  average. 

And  yet,  in  spite  of  all,  you  must  be  prepared  to  be  often  disappointed. 
Why  it  is,  that  freaks  in  Nature  occur  so  frequently  in  one's  experience,  do 
what  the  breeder  may,  is  altogether  inexplicable.  Many  fanciers  there  be  who 
are  prone  to  the  recounting  of  strange  stories  about  their  favorite  strains  of 
stock,  and  of  their  continuous  and  wondrous  success  with  certain  varieties, 
bred  from  some  imaginary  "early  imported  bloods,"  which  would  be 
counted  certainly  marvellous  if  the  tales  could  be  verified.  But  I  have  met 
with  so  many  ups  and  downs  in  chicken -raising,  and  I  have  been  so  often 
deceived  in  my  anticipations,  first  and  last,  that  I  do  not  calculate  very 
accurately  upon  any  thing  coming  exactly  like  its  parentage,  when  I  start  out 
with  new  bloods,  of  late  years,  that  "have  taken  first  prizes,"  for  example,  or 
that  come  down  from  "  Confucius  "  and  "  Hebe,"  with  a  pedigree  "  much 
longer  than  my  arm." 

In  mating  such  samples  (and  I  have  tried  this  more  than  once,  to  my  cost), 
the  progeny  do  not  often  come  up  to  the  mark.  They  have  been  badly 
mated  in  'previous  generations.  The  individual  fowls  thus  purchased  have 
been  rare  samples  to  behold  of  their  accredited  race,  frequently,  and  I  have 
anticipated  "  stunning  results  "  from  the  eggs  laid  by  these  fine  looking  speci- 
mens, that  had  "  won  first  premiums ; "  and  for  which,  on  more  than  one 
occasion  within  my  remembrance,  I  have  cheerfully  paid  down  fifty  to  one 
hundred  dollars  each,  in  the  exhibition-room. 

I  have  sold  eggs  from  these  very  fowls,  at  almost  fabulous  rates,  in 
good  faith,  and  believed,  as  did  the  parties  I  bought  of  and  sold  to,  that  we 
had  something  rare  indeed  in  the  poultry  way.  And  I  have  not  only  been 
wofully  disappointed  myself,  in  the  first  or  second  hatchings  from  such  fowls? 
but  I  have  been  compelled  subsequently  to  endure  the  anathemas  of  incon- 
siderate patrons,  for  sending  them  at  high  cost,  eggs  that  produced  chickens 
of  almost  any  color  save  that  of  the  birds  which  laid  those  eggs.  But  the 
parent  fowls  had  been  contaminated  before  they  reached  my  hands,  and  I 
bred  from  them  only  what  Nature  gave  me,  through  this  impure  channel. 

Thus  I  say  it  is  well  that,  in   selecting  your  original  breeding-stock,  you 


SELECTION  AND   MATING.  135 

pay  attention  to  obtaining  it  out  of  a  strain  that  you  know  to  be  as  pure  as 
can  be  had,  itself,  first.  Then  by  mating  your  birds  in  the  way  I  have  now 
briefly  indicated,  you  may,  as  a  rule,  calculate  upon  getting  a  majority  of 
chickens  that  will  answer  your  expectations   in   color  and  features. 

We  give  place  to  fine  plate  illustrations  on  pages  133  and  143,  of  the  new 
Pea-combed  Partridge  fowls,  a  cock  and  hen — two  years  old  —  bred  from 
imported  Chinese  blood,  and  fostered  by  C.  H.  Edmonds,  Esq.,  of  Melrose, 
Mass.,  for  the  last  four  or  five  years.  The  pictures  are  faithful  representa- 
tions of  these  two  mature  fowls,  which  for  size,  color,  markings,  rotundity  of 
form,  and  good  make-up,  throughout,  are  excelled  by  no  specimens  of  the 
Cochin  varieties  that  we  have  ever  met  with. 

That  the  pea  comb  is  now  a  desideratum  upon  the  Brahmas,  Light  and 
Dark,  is  already  decided  upon.  The  production  of  a  new  variety  of  the 
Cochins  possessing  this  marked  peculiarity,  uniformly,  is  certainly  a  grand 
improvement  upon  the  old  style  of  single  upright  comb,  especially  for  our 
cold  northern  American  climate.  That  the  establishment  of  this  desirable 
feature  has  been  accomplished,  permanently,  upon  the  Partridge  variety,  and 
that  it  has  already  been  transmitted  from  Mr.  Edmonds'  original  stock 
through  five  generations,  down  to  the  summer  of  1874,  is  a  fixed  fact. 

The  stately  trio  of  Dark  Brahmas  so  nicely  portrayed  upon  page  101,  the 
property  of  Mr.  S.  H.  Seamans,  Wauwatosa,  Wis.,  were  imported  by  him  in 
1873,  from  England.  The  drawing  is  from  the  pencil  of  the  celebrated  J.  W. 
Ludlow,  and  these  beautiful  birds  have  been  winners  of  first  prizes  at  the 
American  Western  shows,  deservedly  — being  very  perfect  specimens  of  their 
kind,  from  which  Mr.  Seamans  is  now  breeding,  successfully. 

Mr.  Chamberlin  himself  has  never  "  mentioned  "  any  thing  about  any 
fowls,  that  I  ever  heard  of,  and  he  didn't  go  to  New  York  for  fowls,  at  all. 
Mr.  Cornish  said  (in  1852)  that  "  the  Chamberlin  fowls  were  brought  into 
Connecticut  in  the  early  part  of  1849."  Then  this  same  Mr.  Cornish  said  (in 
1869),  "  These  fowls  came  in  a  ship "  (which  never  arrived  there)  "  to 
New  York,  in  September,  1846." 

This  is  all  that  has  ever  been  known  about  that  mythical  "  one  pair  of 
Grays,"  and  all  that  ever  will  be  known  now,  except  what  I  have  elsewhere 
stated  in  this  work  ;  viz.,  that  no  ship  "arrived  at  New  York  from  Luckipoor 
in  India,"  either  in  1849,  first,  or  in  1846  ;  or  in  1847,  as  a  later  writer  puts 
it.     All  these  stories  are  false  —  as  in  the  final  chapter  I  will  show. 


136  THE  CHINA   FOWL. 

The  advocates  of  this  pea-combed  Chamberlin-gray-fowl  theory  are 
sadly  indisposed  to  agree  in  their  stories.  Mr.  Cornish,  in  1852,  as  we  have 
seen,  did  not  know  "the  sailor"  who  found  this  pair  of  fowls.*  Even  in  1869, 
he  says,  "the  sailor's  name  I  never  noted,  and  cannot  give."  In  1870,  he 
adds  (according  to  Wright),  "my  letters  were  written  at  an  early  day,  when 
the  parties  who  brought  the  fowls  from  India  to  New  York"  (the  sailors  of 
course)  "  were  living,  and  to  be  seen.     They  were  often  seen,"  &c. 

But,  previously  to  this  last  letter,  they  had  all  died  off,  conveniently,  at  the 
right  time,  —  so  it  was  universally  contended.  And  nothing  could  be  learned 
further  of  these  "  all-obscure  men,"  who  could  "  give  no  account  of  the  origin 
of  these  birds,"  as  Cornish  first  avers  in  his  1852  letter !  Yet,  in  1874,  we'' 
find  that  Mr.  Plaisted  good-humoredly  resurrects  them.  In  the  "Poultry 
World"  for  August,  this  writer  says,  "the  unknown  sailor,  of  whom  Mr.  Cor- 
nish writes,  and  whom  Mr.  Burnham  attempts  to  ridicule,  ( still  lives,'  and 
will,  I  trust,  take  an  important  part  in  this  feathered  drama,  now  having  such 
a  remarkable  run.  When  he  comes  on  deck,  let  the  unbelievers  '  look  out  for 
squalls.'  Like  Captain  Cuttle,  he  too  will  '  stand  by,'  and  his  opponents  may 
be  obliged  to  '  take  to  the  long  boat ! ' " 

Now,  we  have  not  "attempted  to  ridicule"  the  "unknown  sailor,"  at  all. 
He  was  a  perfectly  harmless'  and  unoffending  party  in  this  business,  and  he 
has  been  dead  near  twenty  years  !  At  least,  so  we  have  all  been  informed 
repeatedly  by  the  Cornish  men.  If  he  is  alive,  so  much  the  better  for  him, 
individually.  But  we  think  it  is  rather  late  in  the  day  to  trot  this  sailor  out, 
noiv  ;  though  it  may  be,  that,  for  Wright's  and  Cornish's  purposes,  this  ven- 
erable salt  will  prove  a  Bunsby,  indeed;  and  he  may  be  able  to  give  us  "an 
opinion  as  is  an  opinion  "  on  this  vexing  Bother-'em-Pootrum  question.  Still, 
we  submit  that  it  is  not  a  little  strange,  during  all  the  controversy  that  has 
occurred  in  a  quarter  of  a  century  about  the  sailor-Cornish  pair  of  Light-Gray 
fowls,  that  this  ancient  mariner  has  never  before  turned  up  ! 

*  In  August,  1874,  Miss  Watts  of  London  writes  to  Lewis  Wright  that,  "  early  in  1853  she  sent 
her  first  order  for  Light  Brahmas  to  Dr.  Bennett,  and  specified  that  the  fowls  must  be  single- 
combed."  .  .  .  "This  was  objected  to  (in  America)  on  the  score  that  the  single  comb  was  not 
right."  Sopea-comb  birds  were  sent  her.  This  lady  says  she  bred  the  so-called  Chamberlin- 
Bennett  stock,  but  found  "no  Dark  Brahmas  until  after  1862."  when  she  crossed  hers  with  birds 
from  Dr.  Gwynne's  stock;  and  which  Bennett  sent  to  Dr.  Gwynne  from  my  yards,  years  before! 


MODEL   OF    "STANDARD"    DARK    BRAHMA   COCK,    2    YEARS   OLD,    1874. 

As  bred  by  Philander  Williams,  G.  P.  Burnham,  E.  C.  Comey,  J.  P.  Buzzell,  T.  0.  Wardwell. 
Jacob  Graves,  C.  C.  Loring,  C.  W.  Chamberlin,  etc.,  Mass. ;  J.  Y.  Bicknell,  N.  Y. ;  B.  &  J.  Peters, 
Christana,  Del. ;  C.  G.  Sanford,  and  H.  A.  Rhodes,  R.  I. ;  Dr.  C.  H.  Kenegy,  Polo,  111. ;  and  other 
leading  American  fanciers  who  know  the  difference  between  this  and  English  "hocked"  birds. 


"UNCLE    SAM"    AND    "  CORA."       (HAMBEKLIN    LIGHT    BBAHMAS.      (1853.) 

The  above  is  an  English  picture  of  an  early  pair  of  Light  Brahmas  belonging 
to  Miss  E.  Watts  —  author  of  the  London  "  Poultry  Yard  "  —  which  she  im- 
ported from  Dr.  J.  C.  Bennett,  in  1853.  In  1874,  she  writes  that  Mr.  Plaisted 
and  Dr.  B.  selected  all  this  stock  bred  by  her,  up  to  18G2,  when  she  obtained  a 
pullet  to  cross  with  her  own  from  Dr.  Gwynne's  importation  from  America ; 
and  adds  that  "  about  the  same  time  "  when  she  first  received  hers  from  America. 
"  Mr.  Baily,  of  Mount  Street,  London,  received  a  pen  of  Dark  Birds  from  Mr. 
Burnham,  which  were  not  exactly  to  her  fancy,  on  account  of  their  heavy  color  ; 
but  they  were  very  fine." 

In  closing  this  article  upon  selection  and  mating  the  Brahmas,  &c,  for  breed- 
ing, I  ask  the  reader  to  compare  the  above  drawing  of  Dr.  Bennett's  fowls  of 
1853  with  the  picture  of  my  light  Gray  Shanghaes  of  1852,  on  the  opposite 
page.  Both  these  engravings  were  drawn  by  the  same  European  artist,  from 
life.  Is  the  difference  (if  there  be  any,)  discoverable  ?  /  can  not  see  it.  Yet 
one  pair  are  drawn  from  my  "  Gray  Shanghaes  "  in  1852  '3,  and  the  others  are 
from  Miss  E.  Watts'  birds,  sent  her  by  Dr.  Bennett  and  Plaisted,  in  1853  '4. 


PORTRAITS  OF  THE  "LIGHT-GRAY  SHANGHAES,"  drawn  in  1852. 


BURNHAM  AGAINST  WEIGHT. 

"  Life  would  be  a  perpetual  flea-hunt,  if  a  man  were  obliged  to  run  down  all  the  innuendoes, 
inveracities,  insinuations,  and  suspicions  which  are  uttered  against  him. "  —  Rev.  Henry 
Ward  Bee  c  her. 

"  But  for  that  blindness  which  is  inseparable  from  malice,  what  powers  of  evil  would  it 
possess  !  Fortunately  for  mankind,  its  venom,  — like  that  of  the  rattlesnake,  —  when  most 
poisonous,  clouds  the  eye  of  the  reptile,  and  defeats  its  aim."  —  W.  Gilmore  Simms. 

In  closing  this  volume,  I  am  constrained,  in  view  of  certain  demonstra- 
tions promulgated  by  Lewis  Wright,  of  England,  in  a  late  expensive  poultry 
book  he  has  issued  in  London,  to  conclude  my  account  of  the  "  Chixa  Fowl, 
Shanghae,  Cochin,  and  '  Brahma,''  "  with  a  brief  personal  protest  against  the 
rigmarole  and  pointless  twaddle  embodied  in  said  Wright's  recent  attacks 
upon  me  in  that  work,  and  its  smaller  predecessor,  wherein  he  has  so 
wantonly  assailed  Mr.  G.  P.  Burnham  and  his  poultry-stock,  by  his  utterly 
senseless  and  groundless  attempt  at  argument  in  reference  to  the  origin  of 
the  mythical  Cornish-Chamberlin-Sailor-Hatch-Bennett-Brahmapootra  "im- 
portation of  fowls  from  Luckipoor,  in  India ; "  which  silly  tale,  for  twenty  odd 
years  /have  known,  and  which  every  fancier  in  America  has  been  confident 


138  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

was,  in  its  details,  one  of  the  grossest  inventions  at  humbug  that  ever  was 
perpetrated  in  the  whole  history  of  the  hen  fever. 

The  poultry  press  in  this  country  and  England  have  kindly  permitted  me 
to  reply,  through  their  columns,  to  this  utterly  baseless  attack  :  and  I  would 
here  express  my  grateful  obligations  to  Wade's  "Fanciers'  Journal,"  Phila- 
delphia; Stoddard's  "Poultry  World,"  Hartford;  " The  Pet-Stock  Bulletin," 
New  York  ;  "  The  Country  Gentleman,"  Albany  ;  "  The  Turf,  Field,  and 
Farm,"  New  York  ;  "  The  Poultry  Review,"  London  ;  "  The  Poultry  Rec- 
ord," Farmington,  111.  ;  "  The  North-Western  Poultry  Journal,"  Minneapo- 
lis, Wis. ;  "  The  Poultry  Argus,"  Polo,  111.,  and  other  American  and  English 
journals,  for  the  favor  they  have  accorded  me,  in  enabling  me  to  set  myself 
"right  on  the  record"  in  this  affair,  in  reply  to  Lewis  Wright's  unfounded, 
unreasonable,  and  atrocious  assault  upon  a  man  who  never  had  aught  to  do 
with  the  subject-matter  he  treats  of  in  his  abusive  works,  except  to  ridicule 
this  nonsense  and  chicanery,  from  first  to  last. 

Mr.  Wright  commences  upon  a  false  foundation,  starting  out  with  the 
assumption,  in  the  opening  paragraph  of  his  "  Brahma  Fowl "  book,  that  the 
large  Light-Gray  Shanghaes,  Light  Brahmas, —  or  whatever  they  should  right- 
fully be  called, —  were  "  originally  imported  from  India."  He  then  proceeds 
to  argue  the  question  towards  establishing  .this  fallacy,  instea'd  of  either 
accepting  or  reciting  well-known  facts  regarding  the  actual  history  of  the 
origin  of  this  fowl.  He  declares  that  "  it  appeared  to  him  possible  to  throw 
some  additional  light"  upon  this  long  mooted  subject,  and  "to  point,  with 
Mr.  Darwin's  aid,  with  certainty  to  a  scientific  and  rational  conclusion  "  as  to 
whether  these  fowls  came  from  India,  or  from  Shanghae,  in  China. 

When  the  record  was  so  ample  and  so  plain,  at  least  in  this  country,  and 
the  existing  accounts  so  simple,  as  they  have  been  for  more  than  twenty 
years,  it  does  seem  to  the  view  of  an  American  reader  or  fancier,  who  is 
reasonably  posted  in  current  poultry  affairs,  that  this  pretended  "  labor  of 
love,"  on  the  part  of  the  Englishman  has  been  conducted  in  a  most  singu- 
larly hateful  and  stupid  manner,  from  the  outset ;  and  that  Lewis  Wright 
has  evinced  a  most  remarkable  lack  of  foresight  in  the  crudities  he  has  pro- 
mulgated, as  well  as  having  repeated  a  string  of  old  untruths  ;  and  the*  course 
he  has  in  this  instance  pursued,  has  gained  him  no  friends  in  the  United 
States,  verily !     As  to  his  affording  the  poultry  world   any  reliable   informa- 


BURNHAM  VS.    WRIGHT.  139 

tion  about  Brahma  fowl  history,  or  seemingly  gaining  any  real  knowledge  of 
the  subject  for  himself,  his  late  attempts  have  proved  absolutely  but  most 
pitiable  failures. 

What  is  the  use,  for  instance,  of  citing  Mr.  Darwin's  phantasies  to  help 
prove  an  event  that  never  had  an  existence  ?  Either  these  fowls  came  from 
China,  or  India,  or  they  didn't !  Does  the  shape  of  the  skull  in  two  indi- 
vidual samples  of  foreign  poultry,  picked  up  in  a  man's  yard  and  found  to 
differ  somewhat  in  their  internal  or  external  formation,  prove  what  country 
the  birds  came  from?  Yet  this  —  and  these — are  Wright's  arguments  to 
establish  his  theory  that  the  Gray  Shanghaes  (or  now  so-called  Brahmas), 
which  originated  in  Mr.  G.  P.  Burnham's  yards  in  America,  were  "  imported 
from  the  port  of  Luckipoor,  India,  into  New  York,"  on  board  a  ship  that 
never  arrived  there  ! 

And  through  two  huge  volumes  of  this  sort  of  argument  —  scientific, 
literary,  historical,  anatomical,  botanical,  ornithological,  chemical,  and  un- 
natural, this  pedantic  poultry  author  at  second-hand  strings  out  the  details 
of  his  "sailor-yarn,"  ad  nauseam,  in  the  attempt  to  establish  what  never  oc- 
curred, and  which  was  never  really  believed  by  half  a  dozen  persons  on  this 
side  of  the  Atlantic  to  have  contained  the  first  particle  of  truth  or  reason  in 
or  about  it,  from  beginning  to  end.  This  whole  fabricated  tale  was  notori- 
ously known  here  to  have  been  a  regularly  concocted  sham  from  the  start. 

I  do  not  feel  that  I  can  do  better  than  to  make  free  use  of  the  substance 
of  the  articles  that  have  appeared,  in  one  or  other  of  the  first-class  journals 
named  above,  in  thus  defending  myself,  and  in  replying  in  these  pages  to 
Wright,  who  has  been  most  egregiously  sold  by  some  one.  That  he  has  been 
deceived,  through  some  source,  is  very  clear:  although  he  voluntarily 
enlarges  upon  whatever  inimical  information  he  may  have  gathered  to 
enhance  the  venom  of  his  spleen ;  and,  with  certain  undeniable  and  patent 
facts  before  him  (which  he  has  utterly  ignored,  in  his  persistent  tirade),  he 
has  proceded  to  misrepresent,  malign,  misinterpret,  and  interpolate  my  writ- 
ings in  the  most  disingenuous,  unfair,  and  disgraceful  manner,  without  one 
iota  of  provocation  for  his  balderdash  and  slang,  or  reason  for  his  miserable 
attack  upon  me  and  mine,  in  his  two  late  books  on  poultry  matters,  and 
especially  in  connection  with  the  origin  and  early  history  of  the  so-called 
"  Brahma  "  fowls. 


140  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

An  officious  anonymous  correspondent  of  Wade's  Fanciers'  Journal  (who, 
from  the  nature  of  his  calling,  could  much  better  have  employed  his  leisure 
in  doing  his  Master's  service  than  in  thus  meddling  with  a  personal  matter 
entirely  outside  of  his  province,  which  it  was  none  of  his  business  to  inter- 
fere with),  gratuitously  forwarded  to  the  editor  a  long  abusive  extract  from 
one  of  Wrights'  books,  recently,  wherein  the  author  launched  his  assaults 
upon  Mr.  Burnham  without  stint ;  and  which  I  was,  for  the  first  time,  thus 
made  conversant  with,  in  their  particularity.  I  replied  to  this  attack,  that 
Mr.  Wright  had  picked  me  up  without  the  slightest  show  of  reason ;  and 
that,  in  his  remarks  about* my  connection  with  the  "Brahmapootra"  subject, 
he  had  entirely  mistaken  the  position  I  had  always  maintained  towards 
this  notable  humbug ;  inasmuch,  as,  from  outset  to  conclusion,  I  had  never,  in 
any  way,  shape,  or  manner,  been  concerned  in  this  deception,  but,  from  the 
beginning,  had  steadily  and  consistently  fought  it,  and  ridiculed  it  —  for 
more  than  twenty  years  !  I  then  added,  that  Mr.  Wright  in  his  books  did  not 
touch  the  main  question  at  issue  in  this  controversy,  strange  to  say  —  and 
that  is,  as  to  the  time  when,  and  the  mode  in  which,  this  name  "  Brahma- 
pootra "  or  "  Brahma  "  came  about,  and  my  aversion  to  it. 

Imprimis,  you  will  observe,  that  /  (Mr.  Burnham)  never  laid  any  claim 
to  this  "Brahmapootra"  misnomer.  I  did  not  make  this  name.  .1  then 
called  my  fowls  "  Gray  Shanghaes,"  —  never  by  any  other  name,  and  simply 
for  the  good  reason  that  Dr.  Kerr,  who  sent  me  my  first  pair  from  Philadel- 
phia, in  September,  1849,  in  his  letter,  said :  "  Though  they  are  called  '  Chit- 
tagongs ,  (precisely  as  Mr.  Cornish  called  his  at  first),  the  stock  came  to  Penn- 
sylvania from  Shanghae,  China."  My  second  lot  of  Light  Grays  were  pro- 
cured in  1850,  through  Win.  T.  Porter,  Esq.,  editor  of  the  "  New  York  Spirit 
of  the  Times,"  from  on  board  a  ship  at  New  York,  direct  from  Shanghae, 
China.  I  then  had  other  Chinese  fowls  of  different  colors,  but  these  last 
were  light  gray.  What  else  could  I  properly  call  them,  but  what  I  did  ;  viz., 
"Gray  Shanghaes."  And  here  let  me  quote  what  Dr.  Gwynne,  of  England, 
wrote  in  1852 :  — 

"  I  obtained  of  Dr.  Bennett  of  the  United  States,  five  pairs  of  these  birds. 
Three  of  these  ten  fowls  only  had  compressed  pea-combs  ;  in  none  of  the 
others  was  this  found,  nor  could  I  recognize  in  them  any  thing  but  what 
could  be  found  in  the  Shanghae  birds.     I  had  several  communications  from 


BURN  HAM   VS.    WRIGHT.  141 

Dr.  Bennett,  and  in  reply  to  all  my  inquiries,  directed  to  learn  the  cause  of 
naming  as  'a  new  breed,'  birds,  most  of  which  were  essentially  Shanghaes, 
in  shape  and  character,  I  could  gather  no  information  but  that  the  difference 
of  color  between  these  and  other  Shanghaes  precluded  their  being  thus 
classed;  but  I  cannot  accept  this  as  adequate  proof  of  'Brahinapootras' 
being  a  'new  breed,'  and  therefore  prefer  the  conclusion  that  they  are 
identical  with  the  Shanghaes,  and  only  a  new  variety  of  that  fowl.  Another 
circumstance  which  confirms  me  in  this  view,  as  to  the  identity  of  these 
birds  with  the  Shanghae  breed,  is  the  fact  that  the  fowls  recently  presented 
to  her  Majesty,  by  Mr.  Geo.  P.  Burnham,  under  the  name  of  Gray  Shang- 
haes, are  admitted  by  Dr.  Bennett  to  be  'precisely  similar  to  his  own,  and 
Mr.  Burnham  assures  me  that  the  original  stock  from  which  the  'Gray 
Shanghaes,'  presented  to  her  Majesty  were  bred,  was  imported  by  himself, 
through  Dr.  Kerr,  of  Philadelphia,  direct  from  Shanghae." 

Did  Mr.  Lewis  Wright  find  it  convenient  or  useful  to  place  this  square, 
clear  evidence  about  me  and  my  fowls  (written  by  Dr.  Gwynne  in  1852) 
in  his  poultry  book  ?  Not  at  all !  Thus  I  continued  to  designate  my 
fowls,  long  years  after  Dr.  Bennett  fixed  "Brahmapootra"  first,  and  then 
"  Brahma  "  for  his  birds ;  though  at  that  very  time  (1852)  Dr.  Bennett  vol- 
untarily wrote  Dr.  Gwynne,  as  above,  which  was  the  true  statement ;  but 
which  I  do  not  find  in  Mr.  Wright's  account. 

Observe  I  did  not  say  this.  Mr.  Tegetmeier  did  not  say  so.  This  was 
Dr.  J.  C.  Bennett's  own  account,  published  from  him  direct,  in  Rev.  Mr. 
Wingfield's  early  editions  of  his  "  Illustrated  Poultry  Book ; "  see  page  177, 
indorsed  by  Dr.  Gwynne,  himself.  Yet,  notwithstanding  this  patent  fact, 
Mr.  Lewis  Wright  goes  out  of  his  way,  in  the  extract  furnished,  to  assert 
that  "  Dr.  Bennett  got  his  stock  from  Connecticut " —  meaning  from  Cornish, 
I  presume.  I  do  not  know  but  he  did.  What  I  believe  is,  that  it  was  all 
originally  bred  from  my  stock,  though  thus  variously  named  ;  and  Mr.  Cor- 
nish himself  (see  his  letter)  called  his  fowls  "Chittagongs"  (not  Brahmas) 
at  first,  because  they  so  nearly  resembled  the  large  Gray  fowls  (mine)  then 
bred  in  this  country,  so  he  says ;  and  under  which  very  name  Dr.  Kerr 
sent  me  my  first  ones  from  Philadelphia. 

Now,  who  knew  best,  at  that  time,  where  Bennett's  fowls  came  from  ? 
Dr.  Bennett,  or  Mr.  Wright?  The  former  being  the  man  who  sent  the 
fowls  to  England ;  who  raised  this  question   about  a  name  for  them ;  who 


142  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

said,  in  1852,  that  mine  and  his  were  the  same  :  the  latter  in  London,  simply 
uttering  an  ipse  dixit,  based  on  the  Cornish  letter,  which  does  not  mention 
me  or  Dr.  Bennett  either.  Now,  herein  lies  the  utter  inconsistency  of  Mr. 
Wright's  theory,  to  wit :  He  took  for  granted  that  what  Mr.  Cornish  meant 
(not  what  he  said)  was  that  his  fowls  were  "  Brahmas."  But  this  was  not 
true.  Neither  Mr.  Cornish,  Mr.  Chamberlin,  nor  "  the  sailor  who  reported 
he  had  found  some  light  gray  fowls  "  (see  the  Cornish  letter)  then  said  any- 
thing about  these  being  "Brahmas."  This  name,  at  that  time,  ha.d  not 
been  decided  upon  by  anj^body,  and  Mr.  Wright  cannot  find  it  so  used  at  all 
anywhere  (in  1852)  at  the  time  when  he  undertakes  to  prove  his  false 
position  by  quoting  Cornish's  letter.  This  is  very  unfair,  to  say  the  least  of 
it ;  but,  whichever  way  it  was,  surely  J  had  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  all 
this.  I  neither  suggested,  made,  approved,  used,  or  adopted  this  name  of 
"  Brahmapootra  "  or  Brahma  for  my  fowls  —  never.  Yet  Mr.  Wright  dis- 
tinctly asserts  that  "Mr.  Cornish's  statement  was  published  long  before  Mr. 
Burnham's,"  and  that  "  Burnham  might  have  bred  some  very  good  imitation 
Brahmas,"  etc. ;  when  it  is  so  well  known,  and  always  has  been,  that  I  had 
never  claimed,  or  asserted  at  any  time,  anywhere — in  those'years  —  that  I 
ever  imported,  bought,  bred,  owned,  or  sold  any  fowls  known  as  "  Brahma- 
pootras."  Never,  Mr.  Wright !  and.,  you  can  not  find  it  in  the  published 
records  anywhere,  prior  to  the  late  war  —  unless  you  have  so  written  it. 

I  had  then  never  had  aught  to  do  with  naming  the  "Brahma"  fowl. 
I  always  opposed  this  bald  nonsense,  and  would  never  permit  Dr.  Ben- 
nett, Mr.  Cornish,  or  Mr.  Anybody  to  thus  misname  my  fowls.  Every- 
body in  England  and  America  knew  this  j  though  my  name  was,  by  others, 
sometimes  mentioned  in  this  connection.  But,  if  Mr.  Cornish,  Dr.  Bennett, 
or  Mr.  Wright ;  Dr.  Gwynne,  or  Mr.  Baily  ;  Mr.  Tegetmeier,  or  His  Royal 
Highness  Prince  Albert,  chose  (as  some  did,  I  believe,  after  a  while)  to  call 
my  Gray  Shan ghaes  "Brahmas,"  could  I  help  it?  I  never  called  any  of 
their  fowls  "  Gray  Shanghaes,"  surely  ! 

How  a  sensible  man,  who  writes  so  cleverly  as  Wright  does,  usually,  could 
have  wrought  himself  up  to  penning  such  a  tirade  as  he  thus  has,  is  more 
than  I  can  comprehend  —  since  it  is  notorious  that  I  opposed  it  in  com- 
mittees ;  in  my  writings  ;  in  conventions  ;  in  public  and  private  ;  first,  last, 
and  always,  —  upon  the  ever-constant  principle  that  my  fowls  were  "  Gray 
Shanghaes  "  from  the  start,  and  not  "  Brahmapootras." 


PEA-COMHED    PARTRIDGE    COCHIN    HEN,  3    YEARS    OLD    1874. 
From  the  original  stock  of  C  H.  Edmonds,  Melrose,  Mass. 


BURN  HAM   VS.    WEIGHT.  145 

These  had  steadily  been  my  assertions.  Still,  Mr.  Wright  kept  calling  me 
hard  names,  declaring  that  I  "never  had  any  genuine  Brahmas"  (who  says  I 
did  ?),  and  that  "  Burnham  might  have  bred  some  tolerable  imitation  Brahmas" 
(which  I  didn't).  I  had  never  even  said  I  had  any  "  Brahmas  "  whatever,  gen- 
uine or  imitation  ;  that  I  ever  tried  to  breed  "  Brahmas,"  or  pretended  I  did  ; 
I  had  never  even  called  my  fowls  "  Brahmas,"  and  never  would.  And  I  surely 
made  no  statement,  oral  or  written,  in  which  Mr.  Cornish's  fowls  were  involved, 
where  I  was  a  witness  "  more  "  or  "  less  reliable,"  as  Mr.  Wright  states ;  be- 
cause his  "  Chittagongs  "  or  "  Brahmapootras,"  or  whatever  he  named  them, 
never  interfered  with  my  "  Gray  Shanghaes  "  any  more  than  did  Dr.  Ben- 
nett's "  Wild  East-India  Fawn-colored  Dorkings,"  at  this  same  period 
notable. 

Mr.  Wright  lays  great  stress  on  the  fact  that  "  Burnham  vainly  tried  to  pur- 
chase this  stock,  but  did  not  succeed."  Admitted,  again,  that  I  did  not.  Thus, 
of  course,  Mr.  Wright  is  a  good  witness  that  the  fowls  I  had  (presupposing  that 
I  ever  had  any)  were  not  of  this  Cornish-Chamberlin,  "  Chittagong  "  or  "  Brah- 
mapootra "  strain.     This  settles  one  point  clearly. 

But  I  had  better  ones,  and  this  it  was  that  troubled  my  competitors,  as 
thousands  testified  in  favor  of  my  birds,  all  over  the  world,  in  those  years.  I 
raised  over  sixteen  hundred  of  the  "  Gray  Shanghaes  "  in  one  year  (1852  to 
1853)  in  Melrose,  and  sent  them  all  over  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States, 
to  my  generous  patrons'  entire  satisfaction,  but  never  once  calling  them  by  the 
detested  name  of  Brahmapootras,  about  which  Mr.  Wright  has  raised  such  a 
silly  fuss. 

All  this,  be  it  remembered,  I  now  state  as  applying  in  point  of  time  to  the 
period  when  Mr.  Wright  got  out  his  books.  Of  course,  in  the  last  few  years 
(since  this  "Brahma"  name  has  been  so  universally  in  use),  I  have  as  often 
spoken  of  them  as  of  my  Gray  Shanghaes,  because  everybody  latterly  thus 
designates  this  kind  of  poultry,  for  convenience.  And  in  my  "New  Poultry 
Book,"  issued  in  1871,  I  advertised  and  wrote  about  them  as  "Brahmas," 
because  we  had  all  accepted  this  latest  popularly  established  name  — both  in 
England  and  America.  But  not  previously,  when  Wright  published  his 
works.  And  I  solemnly  declare  that  I  never  was  concerned  in  making  or  in 
sustaining  this  name  of  "Brahma"  for  fowls,  and  never  claimed  it  for  my 
stock,  for  I  had  no  occasion  to  do  so. 


146  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

'Now,  the  fowls  lately  coming  from  England  to  the  United  States,  in 
the  shape  of  "fresh  importations"  of  "Cochins"  or  "Brahmas,"  are  hred 
there,  and  very  skilfully  too.  The  Englishmen  call  these  hirds  what  they 
please,  naturally.  Oar  fanciers  and  poultry  societies  follow  suit  —  though, 
in  the  Light  Brahma  class,  we  lead  them  still,  as  we  have  done  from  the 
outset.  The  later  Dark  Brahmas  received  here  from  England,  are  fine ;  but 
I  have  never  heard  of  any  fresh  stock,  of  this  particular  variety  and  color, 
having  been  received  by  anybody  in  Great  Britain,  from  China,  or  "  from 
Luckipoor,  in  India,"  since  the  advent  of  my  first  Dark  Brahmas  (or  Dark 
Gray  Shanghaes)  into  England  in  1853,  as  is  stated  at  that  period  by  Mr.  W. 
B.  Tegetmeier.  And  I  know  of  no  one  who  has  ever  set  up  any  claim  to  have 
received  from  anybody,  anywhere,  previously,  or  since  I  sent  those  Dark 
Brahmas  to  London,  in  that  year,  any  similar  birds  from  any  place  but 
England  ;  while  we  have  yet  to  learn,  with  all  Lewis  Wright's  platitudes,  and 
his  rigmarole  about  his  "  Indian  officers'  reports  "  of  the  existence  of  these  Gray 
"  Brahmas  "  formerly  and  still  in  that  country,  that  there  has  ever,  since  1853, 
been  a  single  bird  of  this  character  brought  thence  into  British  ports ! 

Here  is  another  patent  fact"  for  Mr.  Wright's  consideration.  Does  he  allude 
to  this  important  circumstance  in  either  of  his  ponderous  books  ?  Not  he  ! 
But  I  now  point  to  this  reality  in  earnest.  If  the  Light  and  Dark  "  Brah- 
mas "  were,  or  are,  so  plenty  out  in  India,  with  which  country  the  Britons  are 
known  to  be  so  constantly  in  communication,  why  have  we  or  they  not  chanced 
to  have  had  a  fresh  importation  or  two,  or  a  dozen,  within  the  past  more  than 
twenty  years,  from  this  paradise  of  the  "  Brahma"  varieties  ?  Or,  why  have 
not  similarly-plumed  birds  found  their  way  to  either  England  or  America  from 
China  —  from  Shanghae,  Canton,  King  Po,  or  Hong-Kong,  even  —  in  all 
that  long  period  ?  I  rather  think  Mr.  Lewis  Wright  will  find  this  question  a 
poser  to  answer  satisfactorily,  either  to  himself  or  to  the  breeders  and  ad- 
mirers of  these  two  varieties  that  originated  in  America,  and  were  first 
owned,  bred,  and  shown  publicly  in  this  country  and  in  England,  by  George 
P.  Burnham  of  Melrose,  Mass.,  and  "  not  in  India." 

I  do  not  deny,  and  never  will  dispute  the  fact,  that  this  stock  has  been  at 
times  improved  by  domestication  and  skilful  breeding  in  both  countries,  since 
I  originated  these  birds,  of  either  variety,  as  a  general  thing.  And  yet  I  have 
never  seen  a  finer  lot  of  the  Light  variety  than  those  I  shipped  to  Her  British 


BURN  HAM   VS.    WRIGHT.  147 

Majesty  in  1852,  from  ray  yards  ;  nor  have  I  ever  seen  a  better  trio  of  the 
Dark  strain  than  the  three  splendid  birds  I  first  shipped  in  1853  to  John 
Baily,  of  Mount  Street,  London  ;  and  I  never  expect  to  see  these  twelve  fowls 
excelled  for  size,  beauty,  truthfulness  in  blood,  markings,  or  general  points. 
To-day,  Mr.  Baily. advertises  his  Dark  Brahmas  as  being  "bred  from  stock 
descended  from  Mr.  G.  P.  Burnham's  original  consignment  to  him."  If  the 
Light  and  Dark  Brahmas  are  so  readily  to  be  had,  and  are  so  "  common  in 
India,"  why  haven't  some  of  the  Wrights,  the  Gwynnes,  the  Watts,  the 
Bailys,  the  Bakers,  the  Teebays,  the  Beldons,  and  a  thousand  other  enter- 
prising leading  English  breeders,  obtained  from  "  the  port  of  Luckipoor,  in 
India,  in  the  valley  of  the  Brahmapootra,"  where  these  superb  fowls  are  said 
by  Wright  and  his  officious  "  India  friend  "  to  so  abound  (?)  some  samples  of 
this  celebrated  race  of  poultry,  with  which  to  "  freshen  up  "  the  Yankee  stock 
or  English  strains  that  they  have  been  breeding  in-and-in  so  many  years  ;  but 
which,  in  the  year  1874,  is  as  fine  as  it  was  in  1851,  '52,  in  every  respect,  and 
which  so  "  marvellously  holds  out "  in  all  its  original  proportions  and  charac- 
teristics, form,  weight,  size,  and  comeliness,  notwithstanding  the  tens  of  thou- 
sands, aye  !  hundreds  of  thousands  of  birds  that  have  been  bred  from  my  "  ori- 
ginal seven  "  and  their  progeny,  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic,  during  the  last 
more  than  two  decades  of  years  ? 

Come,  Mr.  Lewis  Wright !  You  know  some  things  about  poultry,  though 
you  really  know  precious  little  about  the  Brahma  fowl-origin,  evidently.  We 
have  in  the  United  States,  to-day,  five  hundred  fanciers  who  can  teach  you  the 
A,  B,  C,  of  this  business  ;  malgre  all  your  profundity  in  a  general  way  in 
the  science  of  chickenology.  Will  you,  for  the '  benefit  of  the  fancy  in 
America  and  Great  Britain,  please  give  your  views  in  response  to  these 
queries  I  have  just  herein  suggested  ?  I  do  not  ask  this  upon  my  own 
account,  because  I  know  all  about  this  "  little  joker,"  the  "  Brahmapootra." 
I  am  not  a  fool,  if  I  am  the  deceiver  you  attempt,  in  your  two  books,  to 
make  me  out.  And  I  have  studied  this  subject  "  in  a  reverent  spirit,"  for  the 
greater  part  of  the  last  quarter  of  a  century,  assiduously.  I  know  this 
Burampooter-Brahmapootra-Gray-Shanghae-i?raA??£a  subject  through  and 
through  ;  although  you  facetiously  express  the  opinion  in  your  "monograph 
of  the  Brahma  Fowl,"  page  46,  that  "to  every  breeder  of  this  fowl,  it  will 
be  evident  that  the  amount  of  knowledge  here  hinted  at  is  not  very  great, 


148  THE  CHINA   FOWL. 

and  that  nothing  could  better  show  Burnham's  ignorance  of  the  fowl  itself, 
than  his  expression  of  opinion." 

Ah,  Lewis,  you  have  a  deal  to  learn  upon  this  subject,  yet!  And  I  am 
sure  it  will  not  savor  of  boasting,  when  I  affirm  that  I  have  long  ago  forgotten 
more  than  you  can  ever  know  about  the  wretched  humbug  of  this  Brahma- 
pootraism ;  though  I  never  was  inveigled  into,  or  implicated  in  it,  indi- 
vidually, thank  heaven  !  except  to  fight  and  satirize  it.  That  part  of  the 
work  I  have  faithfully  attended  to,  first  and  last,  for  over  twenty  years,  and  I 
have  not  finished  yet :  since  such  men  as  you  are,  keep  rising  up,  like  Ban- 
quo's  ghost,  —  whom  I  am  compelled  to  "  lay,"  —  one  after  another  ;  and  this 
keeps  me  busy  still  in  this  direction. 

You  have  shown  yourself  pretty  clever  at  railing,  Lewis,  but  your  recent 
efforts,  in  terrorem,  pointed  at  me,  will  not  have  the  desired  effect  you  evidently 
aimed  at.  You  can  not  "  rail  the  seal  from  off  my  bond  "  in  this  controversy, 
through  your  mulish  contumacy  and  clumsy  platitudes,  while  these  two  farts 
stand  upon  the  record;  viz.,  1st.  "Mr.  Geo.  P.  Burnham  exhibited  in  Boston 
the  first  Gray  Shanghae  fowls  ever  seen  there  ;  from  which  stock,  bred  in  his 
yards,  Dr.  John  C.  Bennett  produced  the  first  so-called  '  Light  Brahmas ' 
ever  shown  in  the  world  ;  2d.  Mr.  Geo.  P.  Burnham  sent  to  England,  early  in 
1853,  the  first  trio  of  '  Dark  Brahmas '  ever  seen  there,  or  anywhere  else, 
which  latter  (from  the  same  original  stock)  went  from  Mr.  Burnham's  yards 
in  Melrose,  Mass.,  direct  to  Mr.  John  Baily,  of  London." 

Thus  much  is  certain  —  deny  it,  argue  it,  or  dispute  it,  who  will ! 

Nobody  shows  (upon  the  past  record)  any  of  this  now  so-called  Brahma 
stock,  of  either  Light  or  Dark  varieties  prior  to  those  two  showings.  Since 
then,  you  can  point  to  no  one  fresh  "importation"  by  anybody,  either  in 
England  or  America,  of  a  single  Light  or  Dark  Gray  Shanghae,  or  "  Brahma  " 
fowl  from  India,  China,  or  other  Eastern  country  !  There  have  been  none 
since.  There  were  none  before.  And  I  challenge  you,  or  any  man  on  earth 
to  show  that  this  "explicit  statement "  of  mine  is  not  true,  to  the  letter. 

I  care  not  who  has  bred  this  stock  since  then.  I  am  indifferent  as  to  who 
has  raised  other  Light  Gray  fowls  since  that  period.  It  is  immaterial  to  me 
what  birds  have  been  reared  since  the  time  when  I  first  showed  and  sent 
those  two  varieties  of  "a  xew  breed  of  poultry"  all  over  the  world.  And 
it  is  of  the  very  least  importance  how  this  may  have  been  effected  after  me. 


BURN  HAM   VS.    WRIGHT.  149 

I  furnished  the  stock  of  the  two  original  strains  of  now  so-called  Light  and 
Dark  Brahmas  —  though  I  called  it  by  its  rightful  name  at,  and  from,  the 
outset ;  while  Dr.  Bennett  {first)  then  Cornish,  with  a  hundred  others,  and, 
lastly,  Lewis  Wright,  chose  to  nick -name  these  fine  birds  by  another  title. 
This  J  could  not  control.  But  the  facts  remain,  and  the  fowls  are  to-day  un- 
changed—  save  that,- in  the  main,  they  have  been  somewhat  improved  upon 
by  long  domestication  and  careful  breeding,  in  the  hands  of  skilful  fanciers 
on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic.  When  you  can  show  us  that  these  assertions 
are  incorrect,  and  when  you  are  able  to  satisfactorily  answer  the  queries  I 
have  herein  propounded  —  it  will  be  quite  time,  Mr.  Wright,  to  talk  of  and 
argue  the  points  referring  to  the  assumed  pre-history  of  the  Cornish-Cham- 
berlin-Bennett-Hatch-Knox-"  imported-froni-India  "-Brahmapootra  strains. 

Perhaps  you  do  know  sufficient  about  this  business  to  reply  to  the  ques- 
tions I  have  proposed.  Will  you  then  please  tell  us,  also,  why  it  is  that  the  two 
Cornish  assertions  (which  statements  you  inform  me  by  letter  dated  London, 
May  23,  1874,  are  the  basis  of  your  opinions  and  theory),  about  the  arrival 
of  his  fowls  "  in  the  ships  at  New  York  from  India  in  1849,"  and  twenty 
years  afterwards  that  "they  arrived  from  Luckipoor,  in  India,  in  September, 
1846,"  are  considered  by  you  to  be  "  accurate  and  conclusive  evidence  "  that 
Burnham  is  a  deceiver  and  a  swindler,  and  that  "his  stock  is  spurious," 
when  said  Burnham,  his  fowls  nor  his  existence  is  once  referred  to,  nor  hinted 
at,  in  those  two  letters  ?  And  will  you  be  kind  enough,  at  the  same  time 
(though  I  would  not  occasion  you  too  much  trouble  at  once),  to  inform  us 
ignorant  and  illiterate  people  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic,  why  those  India 
ships,  arriving  at  New  York,  with  the  Cornish-Chamberlin  gray  fowls  in  1849 
first,  and  in  1846  aftenvards,  never  made  any  "  port  entry  "  at  the  Custom- 
house in  New  York,  of  "ship,  or  captain,"  as  our  United  States  revenue  laws 
imperatively  require?  Were  fowls,  ship,  captain,  sailor,  obscure  owner  — 
all  smuggled  into  New  York  ?  And  is  this  the  reason  why  everybody  so 
conveniently  forgot  the  date  and  the  reticent  parties  who  had  to  do  with  this 
"little  job"?  It  may  be  so;  but  I  think  this  hardly  possible.  Still,  this 
hypothesis  is  a  far  more  reasonable  one  than  are  the  published  conclusions 
upon  your  premises,  which  you  so  triumphantly  indulge  in  at  my  expense, 
in  view  of  the  actual  facts  existing  in  this  important  point  in  the  case,  as  I 
have  fairly  presented  them. 


150  THE  CHINA   FOWL. 

The  limits  of  this  volume  will  not  afford  me  space  to  argue  this  question, 
were  I  inclined  to  do  so,  which  I  am  not.  And  I  simply  present  these  in- 
terrogatories as  pertinent,  in  my  judgment,  to  the  issue  involved.  If  Mr. 
Wright  can  answer  these  plain  queries,  we  shall  certainly  thus  learn  what 
we  do  not  at  present  know  in  America ;  and  I  have  always  believed  that  we 
knew  all  that  anj^body  did  upon  this  "Brahma-origin  "  topic.  His  reasoning 
and  sophistry  are  of  no  mortal  account.  His  pedantic  display  in  tautological 
and  technical  particularities,  as  to  the  formation  of  the  skulls  of  the  now 
so-called  "Brahmas,"  and  the  now  so-called  "Cochins,"  in  comparison, 
carries  no  more  weight  with  it  than  would  the  utterance  of  so  much  Sanscrit 
in  the  estimation  of  ordinary  fowl-breeders ;  who,  nevertheless,  appreciate 
all  this  "  moonshine  "  at  its  true  value. 

And  so  I  shall  not  here  attempt  to  answer  his  "points,"  seriatim,  in  kind; 
since  I  am  only  desirous  to  place  the  naked  facts  before  my  readers,  in  as 
plain  a  dress  as  my  humble  capacity  to  make  myself  understood  will  permit, 
leaving  it  to  their  common  intelligence  to  decide,  after  examining  said  facts, 
whether  Wright  is  wrong,  or  Burnham  is  right  —  or  otherwise,  —  in  this 
already  greatly  over-discussed  matter.  I  have  stated  that  Wright  has 
interpolated  and  misquoted  me  and  others  in  his  books,  to  my  personal  dis- 
advantage, most  maliciously.  Below,  I  give  an  example  (out  of  dozens  that 
I  might  quote,  had  I  room  in  this  book),  where  Mr.  Wright  indulges  in  this 
sort  of'  contemptible  wrong  and  distortion  towards  me.  In  the  English 
"  Cottage    Gardener,"    1853,   appears  this  sentence,  which  I  extract  to  the 

letter :  — 

( The  original  pai  agraph . ) 

"Mr.  P.  Jones  states  the  fact  of  a  pair  of  Gray  chickens  he  bought"  (of 
whom  ?)  " breeding  'silver  cinnamon'  offspring;  whilst  the  pure  unmixed 
stock  of  Dr.  Gwynne,  who  had  his  direct  from  Dr.  Bennett,  and  a  Mr. 
Sheenan  and  others,"  (not  Burnham !)  "  invariably  bred  pure  gray."  And 
again,  same  paper,  "while  what  have  been  considered  as  the  purest  strain 
of  the  Brahma  Poutras  have  thrown  pure  chickens  only,  we  know,  on  good 
authority,  that  the  produce  of  imported  birds  of  equally  high  pretensions 
have  produced  Buff  chickens  with  black  hackles." 

And  here  is  the  manner  (italics  and  all)  in  which  Lewis  Wright  cooks  up 
this  paragragh,  when  he  pretends  to  make  this  extract  for  his  "Poultry 
Book,"  see  page  241,  to  aid  him  to  "  confound  Burnham  "  with  ! 


BURN  HAM   VS.    WRIGHT.  151 

(The  quotation  as  printed  by  Wright.) 

"  Mr.  P.  Jones,  in  the  Cottage  Gardener,  tells  of  a  pair  of  gray  chickens  he 
bought  breeding  silver  cinnamon  offspring,  —  a  sure  sign  of  crossing,  —  while 
the  pure  unmixed  stock,  obtained  direct  from  Dr.  Bennett,  who  had  his  from 
Mr.  Cornish,  '  invariably  bred  pure  gray.'  In  the  same  year  the  editor  himself 
writes,  that  'while  what  have  been  considered  the  purest  strain  of  Brahma 
Poutras  have  thrown  pure  chickens  only,  we  know  on  good  authority  that  the 
produce  of  imported  birds  of  equally  high  pretensions  (Burnham's)  have  pro- 
duced Buff  chickens  with  black  hackles. ;  " 

Is  this —  with  its  italics,  alterations,  and  additions  —  penned  by  Wright  in  a 
Christian  temper  ?  Is  this  "conducting  the  poultry  fancy  in  a  reverent 
spirit  ?  "  Is  this  "  striving  in  the  fear  of  God  to  do  good  to  the  community, 
of  which  we  form  a  part  ?  "  as  Lewis  Wright,  in  the  preface  to  this  very 
"Brahma  Fowl "  book  (first  editions)  cantingly  claims  we  should  do?  .  .'. 
This  entire  perversion  of  the  sense  and  text  of  the  original  paragraph,  thus 
garbled  by  Wright,  — which  in  no  one- word  refers  to  me  or  my  fowls,  any  more 
than  do  the  two  Cornish  letters  he  similarly  garbles,  —  I  simply  pronounce  ut- 
terly false,  as  well  as  infamous.  And  Wright  knew  he  was  uttering  this  falsity, 
and  perpetrating  this  infamy,  when  he  thus  inserted  my  name  in  parenthesis 
in,  and  changed  the  phrasing  of,  that  paragraph,  thus  ignobly,  gratuitously, 
and  designedly  —  as  he  has  similarly  done  in  other  places. 

This  is  but  a  single  instance  of  Wright's  folly  and  contumely  towards  me ; 
and,  as  to  the  paragraph  just  quoted  from  the  "  Cottage  Gardener,"  —  I 
never  knew,  or  heard  of  the  instance,  in  my  whole  five-and-twenty  year's  ex- 
perience with  my  Gray  stock,  where  a  "  buff  chicken  "  appeared  among  their 
progeny,  —  in  my  own  yards,  nor  in  the  hands  of  any  other  person  who  bred 
my  gray  fowls  clean,  —  either  in  America  or  England ;  and  I  do  not  believe 
the  case  ever  occurred.  They  did  breed  all  shades  of  Light  and  Dark  gray 
birds ;  but  never  a  buff  one,  within  my  knowledge,  from  1849  to  1874,  in- 
clusive. While,  on  the  other  hand,  in  reference  to  the  Cornish-Bennett 
strain,  prated  about  by  Wright  in  this  altered  quotation  he  makes,  I  find 
in  June,  1874,  in  the  "  Poultry  World,"  written  by  Mr.  Plaisted  (Dr.  Ben- 
nett's business  partner  in  the  chicken  trade  in  1853  and  '54),  these  re- 
markably candid  words  upon  this  very  subject :  — 

"  Dr.  Bennett  removed  to  Iowa,  in   March,  1853"  (from  New  Hampshire). 
"He  was  unable   to  endure  the  western  climate,  and  made  me  a  proposition 


152  THE   CHINA   FOWL. 

to  go  into  company  in  the  poultry-stock  business  "  (at  Great  Falls,  N.  H.), 
"  which  I  accepted.  He  returned  in  October,  1853,  and  this  plan  was  car- 
ried out  to  the  letter."  ..."  I  selected  every  Brahma  that  Dr.  Bennett  or 
Bennett  &  Plaisted  ever  shipped  to  England,  excepting  the  pair  (lie  first) 
sent  to  Dr.  Gwynne."  .  .  .  "All  these  Brahmas,  shipped  to  England,  were 
bred  either  by  Dr.  Bennett,  S.  0.  Hatch,  George  Smith,  or  myself,  excepting 
the  pair  sent  to  Dr.  Gwynne.  I  know  this  for  a  certainty,  and  these  are  the 
fowls  which  Mr.  L.  Wright  has  described  as  Dr.  Bennett's  "  pure  Brahmas." 
In  breeding  these,  many  different  shades  of  color  were  produced,  the  most 
objectionable  being  pure  buff,  with  the  exception  of  a  pencilled  neck,  as  fine 
a  color  as  tuesee  to-day  among  the  Buff  Cochins."  .  .  .  "Deeming  it  best  to 
keep  these  out  of  the  stock  as  much  as  possible,  I  selected  those  with  fine 
pencilled  necks,  black  tails,  &c."  ..."  I  had  more  fear  of  the  buff  showing 
itself  from  the  stock  sent  to  England  by  us,  than  of  any  thing  else.  It  was 
reasonable  to  suppose  that,  if  they  bred  all  colors  the  first  year  or  two,  the 
English  fanciers  would  reject  them,  and  consider  that  we  had  been  playing  a 
1  Yankee  trick.'  Whatever  may  be  said  of  the  early  history  of  these  '  Brah- 
mas/ it  is  an  indisputable  fact,  that  buffs  were  found  in  all  the  yards  where 
they  were  bred,  as  well  as  the  shades  of  color- before  mentioned."  ..."  Mr. 
Wright  thinks  those  sent  to  England  by  Mr.  George  P.  Burnham  were 
mongrels.  These  I  know  nothing  about.  He  (Wright)  gives  as  his  reason, 
that  they  bred  buff  ;  yet  they  might  have  been  as  pure  as  any  of  the  others 
sent,  and  still  breed  buff  progeny." 

This  from  Mr.  C.  C.  Plaisted,  in  1874,  who  claims  that  he  is  writing  a  fresh 
history  for  the  "World,"  of  the  Cornish-Chamberlin-Bennett-Hatch  "pure 
Brahmapootras,"  and  who  "  knows  nothing  about "  the  gray  fowls  Mr.  G.  P. 
Burnham  sent  to  England,  which  Wright  falsely  says  "produced  buff  chick- 
ens with  black  hackles."  It  is  pretty  clear  from  this  account,  so  frankly 
given  by  Mr.  Plaisted,  and  so  accurately  (as  I  know  it  to  be),  that  the 
buff-chicken  breeding  from  the  Grays,  in  England,  occurred  with  this  very 
Cornish-Bennett  stock  that  Wright  so  lauds  (at  my  expense)  !  And,  since  I 
can  affirm  that  I  never  sold  a  gray  fowl  in  England  to  "  Mr.  P.  Jones,"  to 
the  "  editor  of  the  Cottage  Gardener,"  or  to  "  a  Mr.  Sheenan,"  in  my  life, 
and  never  knew  or  heard  of  a  case  where  my  Gray  Shanghaes  ever  once 
threw  a  buff  chicken,  anywhere,  in  all  my  experience,  I  declare  this  to  be 
another  coined  falsity  of  Wright,  made  up  out  of  whole  cloth,  to  serve  the 
dastardly  purpose  he  had  in  view  in  thus  interpolating  and  altering  this 
quotation  he  makes  (upon  this  particular  point)  in  his  two  densely  muddled 
"  historical  "  chicken  books.  \ 


BURN  HAM   VS.    WEIGHT.  15.3 

After  the  foregoing  pages  were  printed,  Mr.  Wright  in  his  August  Gazette 
renewed  Ins  attack  upon  me.  Instead  of  noting  my  answer  to  his  original 
assaults,  he  turns  to  the  "  Hen  Fever  "  to  sustain  his  falsities;  and  starts  anew 
with  his  old  crudities,  in  a  promise  "  to  do  Mr.  Burnham  justice."     He  says  — 

"I  state  (on  page  2-40  of  my  "Book  of  Poultry,")  that,  in  the  Hen  Fever,  Burnham  affirms  that 
Light  and  Dark  Brahmas  had  distinct  origins,  but  that  he  —  modest  man  !  — had  made  them  both  ; 
the  Light  by  breeding  from  some  pure,  uncrossed  Grey  Cochins,  the  Dark  by  crossing  Cochins  with 
Grey  Chittagongs  ....  Lateen  1852  he  sent  over  a  consignment  of  so-called  Light  Brahmas 
to  Her  Majesty  the  Queen,  and  in  the  following  year  a  number  of  Dark  birds  to  various  breeders. 
And  again  on  page  244,  I  observe :  When  Burnham  said  that  the  Dark  Brahmas  were  formed  bv  a 
cross  between  Grey  Chittagongs  and  Cochins,  he  meant,  &c,  &c." 

In  what  I  did  write,  I  "  meant "  precisely  what  I  said  —  and  not  what  Lewis 
Wright  falsely  "  quotes,"  or  affirms  that  I  said.  I  have  already,  in  these  pages, 
insisted  that  I  never  made  the  above  statements,  and  that  I  never  "  sent  over 
any  so-called  Light  Brahmas  to  Her  Majesty."  I  sent  the  Queen  a  cage  of  my 
"  Gray  Shanghaes,"  only.  Then  "  so  called  "  by  me,  always  so  called  by  me, 
accepted  by  Her  Majesty  as  "  Gray  Shanghaes"  —  and  nothing  else. 

I  now  repeat  that  the  sentences  Wright  pretends  thus  to  quote  from  my  early 
book,  do  not  appear  there.  The  term  "  Dark  Brahmas  "  is  not  once  used  in  the 
entire  325  pages  of  my  "Hen  Fever!"  Nor  is  the  sentence  that  I  "made  the 
Light  Brahmas  by  breeding  from  pure,  uncrossed  Grey  Cochins,"  in  that  vol- 
ume —  anywhere.  Again  —  the  lines  "  Burnham  said  that  the  Dark  Brahmas 
were  formed  by  a  cross  between  Grey  Chittagongs  and  Cochins,"  are  Wright's 
words  —  not  mine.     I  never  said  so,  or  penned  this  paragraph. 

I  now  say  that  neither  the  Dark  "  Brahmas  "  or  the  Dark  a  Grey  Shanghaes  " 
are  alluded  to,  in  the  Hen  Fever.  But,  in  order  to  back  up  his  first  falsities, 
Wright  fabricated  this  stuff,  in  his  "  Book  of  Poultry,"  and  adheres  to  it,  yet ! 

In  the  name  of  all  that  is  righteous  or  decent,  is  this  sort  of  "  argument "  fair 
dealing  towards  me,  on  the  part  of  Lewis  Wright?  On  pages  150  and  151  I  ex- 
pose other  altered  and  interpolated  quotations  made  by  Wright — in  a  similar 
vein,  with  a  similar  sinister  purpose.  Still,  in  his  London  paper  of  August  2  2d, 
'74,  he  reproduces  a  part  of  Cornish's  first  1852  letter,  (adroitly  leaving  out  the 
sentence  he  prints  from  that  document  in  his  "Brahma  Fowl"  in  1870,  which 
declares  that  "  Chamberlin  got  his  Gray  fowls  i&  1849  ! !")  and  the  whole  of  the 
second  1869  letter,  wherein  Cornish  says  he  "got  them  in  1846  "  —  to  re-bolster 
his  previous  blunders  coupled  with  Cornish's  two  accounts  ;  which  last  mentioned 
article  he  concludes  with  this  remarkable  passage :  "  I  promise  that  my  next 
accounts  from  Mr.  Burnham  will  not  be  heavy  reading  .  .  .  and  I  '  fudge,' 
this  week,  by  simply  giving  that  of  Mr.  Cornish." 


154  THE    CHINA  FOWL. 

This  word  fudge,  used  by  Wright,  I  did  not  at  first  appreceiate.  Upon  con- 
sulting Webster,  however,  I  find  the  definition  of  this  ungraceful  term  to  be  as 
follows:  "Fudge  —  v.  t.  To  devise  ;  to  contrive  ;  to  fabricate  ;  to  foist  ;  to  in- 
terpolate." In  his  London  Gazette,  page  337,  Wright  says  —  "I  fudge,  this- 
week,  by  simply  giving  the  accounts  of  Mr.  Cornish."  To  which  /  add,  (not- 
withstanding Wright's  frank  confession  of  his  offense,  in  this  instance,)  that  he 
has  been  constantly  "  fudging,"  from  the  outset !  Yet  it  is  refreshing  to  see 
him  admit  that  he  has  devised,  contrived,  fabricated,  foisted,  and  interpolated. 

And  here  I  will  note  the  fact  that  the  "  Poultry  World  "  for  September  con- 
tains a  portrait  of  Mr.  Chas.  Knox,  in  1847,  "a  clerk  on  a  Hartford  and  New 
York  propeller " — whom  Mr.  Plaisted  argues  is  "the  sailor"  we  have  heard 
so  much  of,  in  connection  with  the  Cornish-Chamberlin-Brahma-pootras.  A 
pleasant  but  indefinite  letter  is  given  from  Mr.  Knox,  who  says  "  In  1847  I  went 
on  board  a  ship  at  New  York,  to  look  at  two  pairs  of  remarkable  poultry,  which 
were  to  be  exhibited  at  Franklin  Market"  —  and  "next  trip  (after  reporting  to 
Mr.  Chamberlin)  I  went  and  bought  the  gray  pair,  and  took  them  to  Hartford." 
He,  too,  states  that  he  "  never  knew  what  port  this  vessel  came  from,  nor  her 
name  ; "  and  "  this  is  all  he  can  remember  of  the  transaction." 

I  only  say  to  this  that  I  never  before  heard  of  Mr.  Knox,  who  it  appears  was 
no  "  sailor,"  but  a  clerk  on  a  propeller  in  1847  ;  now  a  highly  respectable  gentle- 
man in  Ohio  —  "a  man  of  honor  and  alike  of  wealth."  I  have  no  doubt  he 
"  saw  "  and  "  bought  a  gray  pair  of  fowls,"  as  he  avers.  /  have  done  this  same 
thing,  often.  But  I  cannot  conceive  what  this  gentleman's  seeing,  buying,  or 
writing  about  "  this  transaction  in  1847  "  has  to  do  with  me,  or  mine  —  since  he 
makes  no  reference- to  Mr.  Burnham  or  his  poultry,  in  this  account.  And  surely 
it  can  have  no  bearing  upon  "  accurate  "  Mr.  Comistis  two  stories  about  "  Brah- 
ma-pootras."  Yet  this  new  theory  is  as  plausible  as  Wright's  old  one ;  though, 
as  I  have  said  before,  it  is  rather  late  in  the  day  to  cook  this  tale  up,  and  apply 
it  as  "  history,"  thus  ex  post  facto. 

However,  I  know  nothing  about  Mr.  Knox,  or  this  1847  pair  of  gray  fowls. 
I  never  saw  them,  or  heard  of  them  before.  My  affair  is  with  Lewis  Wright, 
and  his  stupid  Cornish-yarns  of  1849  and  1846.  In  giving  this  letter  from  Mr. 
Knox,  dated  "  Toledo,  a,  July  22d,  1874,"  Mr.  C,  C.  Plaisted  exultingly  enquires, 
with  King  John,  ik  Have  I  not  here  the  best  cards  for  the  game  f  "  In  answer  to 
which  I  reply,  "  I  think  not  —  since  you  have  'shewn  your  hand;'  and  it  does 
not  look  to  me  like  a  winning  one.     You  have  'called'  too  soon,  friend  P!" 


BTJRNHAM   VS.    WRIGHT.  155 

It  is  generally  known  among  poultry  fanciers  in  America.,  that  Mr.  Virgil 
Cornish  of  Connecticut  has  written  the  two  letters  which  have  been  published, 
referring  to  "a  pair  of  large  light-gray  fowls"  which  a  Mr.  Chamberlin  is 
said  to  have  become  possessed  of,  mysteriously,  in  the  early  years  of  the 
poultry  mania.  These  two  letters  (nearly  twenty  years  apart  in  their  dates) 
are  reprinted  in  both  of  Lewis  Wright's  latest  books ;  and  upon  these  two 
different  accounts  by  Cornish,  Mr.  Wright  tells  us  he  bases  his  singular  theory 
of  the  "  origin  of  the  Brahma  fowls." 

In  one  of  these  published  letters,  —  the  first,  dated  March,  1852,  —  Cornish 
says,  his  fowls  "  came  to  New  York  in  the  India  ship,"  and  thence  "  into 
Connecticut,  in  1849;"  and  "it  is  certain  they  never  were  bred  until  they 
reached  this  [his]  town."  In  the  other  letter,  Cornish  says,  just  as  "definitely 
and  accurately  "  (which  second  letter  is  dated  November  9,  1869),  "  the  ship 
arrived  with  my  fowls  at  New  York  in  September,  1846  !  I  bought  the  first 
brood  hatched  out,  and,  in  April  following,  the  old  pair  !  " 

Now,  what  is  there  "  explicit "  or  "  accurate  "  in  these  two  distinctly  dif- 
ferent statements  of  Cornish,  that  he  first  got  his  pair  of  fowls  from  the  sailors 
of  the  India  ships  at  New  York  in  1849,"  that  "  it  is  certain  they  never  were 
bred  till  they  reached  Connecticut,"  and  his  "town,  in  that  year;"  then  (in 
1869)  stating  that  they  "  arrived  at  New  York  in  a  ship  from  Luckipoor,  in 
India,  September,  1846,"  and  he  "  got  the  first  brood  hatched  in  1847,"  etc.  ? 

Mr.  Lewis  Wright's  capacity  for  understanding  very  plain  language  must 
be  most  indifferent,  indeed,  if  he  cannot  see  the  inconsistent  character  of  these 
two  accounts!  But,  in  addition  to  this, — not  by  one  syllable,  in  either 
of  these  letters  which  he  quotes  from  Cornish,  does  that  gentleman  allude  to 
me,  in  the  remotest  way.    Why,  then,  should  Wright  drag  me  into  this  mess? 

Mr.  Cornish  and  Mr.  Burnham  never  once,  in  those  years  (before  Wright 
wrote  his.  books),  or  since,  ever  had  any  dispute  or  "conflict."  And  is  it 
not  clear,  upon  a  moment's  examination,  in  view  of  the  above  two  antago- 
nistic accounts,  that  both  Mr.  Wright's  false  theory  and  Cornish's  repeated 
misstatements  alike  "  go  up  in  a  balloon  ?  " 

In  Wright,  page  17,  we  have  it  thus  :  Cornisb  says  that  "  Chamberlin 
brought  his  fowls  into  Connecticut  in  the  early  part  of  1849."  Mr.  Cornish 
says,  in  the  same  letter,  "I  got  my  stock  from  Chamberlin,  direct."  Then 
he  says  (in  1869),  the  ship  with  these  fowls  on  board  arrived  in  1846 !  Most 
of  the  first  brood  came  out  in  May,  1847,  which  I  purchased  in  August,  and 


156  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

the  old  pair  in  April  following."  Tims,  though  he  asserts  clearly,  in  March 
2,  1852,  that  Chamberlin  did  not  "  bring  his  fowls  into  the  State  until  1849," 
he  "purchased  of  Chamberlin  the  most  of  the  first  brood  in  August,  1847, 
and  the  old  pair  in  April,  1848  !  "  And,  in  that  same  first  letter  (see  Wright, 
page  16,  and  Miss  Watts'  Poultry  Yard,  page  62,  printed  in  italics),  Cornish 
says,  "it  is  certain  they  never  were  bred  till  they  reached  his  town,  in  1849  ! " 

Now,  I  will  shortly  present  the  recent  evidence  of  a  Connecticut  Light- 
Brahma  writer  and  breeder,  in  reference  to  Cornish's  two  statements,  who 
positively  asserts  that  "there  is  nothing  accurate  in  the  first  one;  that  the 
last  one  is  still  worse ;  that  Cornish  did  not  purchase  Chamberlin's  first 
brood;  and  that  he  never  owned  any  'old  pair'  of  Grays,  at  any  time  ! " 
Which  assertions  will  be  backed  by  three  witnesses,  now  alive,  at  Hartford. 

Yet  Lewis  Wright  repeatedly  insists,  in  his  two  works,  that  "  Mr.  Cornish's 
accounts  are  the  only  reliable  ones  published ;  "  that  "Cornish  tells  the  story 
of  the  Brahma  origin  accurately  and  clearly ; "  that  Virgil  Cornish's  state- 
ments "  are  explicit  and  indisputable  ; "  that  "  no  one  can  question  Mr.  Cor- 
nish's accuracy ; "  and  that,  for  all  the  details  of  his  stupid  and  utterly  falla- 
cious theory,  he  (Wright)  relies  upon  "the  unimpeachable,  succinct,  consistent, 
truthful,  clearly-narrated  statements  made  and  repeated  by  Yirgil  Cornish  ! " 

However,  I  must  not  omit  just  here  to  repeat  that  in  neither  of  the  above 
accounts  of  Mr.  Cornish  —  whether  they  be  false  or  true  —  does  that  gentle- 
man once  refer  to  me,  or  to  my  fowls,  in  the  remotest  way.  And  I  will  add 
that  I  should  not  now  have  spoken  of  Mr.  Cornish  but  that  Wright  goes  so 
far  out  of  his  way  in  the  endeavor  to  sustain  his  nonsensical  theory  in  his  two 
books  as  to  drag  Mr.  Cornish  and  myself  before  the  public,  antagonistically ; 
when  the  exact  truth  in  this  matter  is,  that  Mr.  Cornish  and  Mr.  Burnham 
never  had  a  word  of  difference,  written  or  verbal,  until  Wright  thus  pitted 
them  against  each  other,  for  his  own  inexplicable  purposes.*  And  here  I  call 
especial  attention  to  the  pertinent  extracts  on  pages  158  to  161. 

*  Since  these  present  pages  were  written,  —  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  Mr.  Burnham  had 
previously,  through  the  poultry  journals  and  by  private  letters,  communicated  the  true  state  of  the 
case  to  Mr.  Wright,  in  full,  —  this  gratuitous  maligner  in  the  papers  assumes  new  grounds  of 
assault,  and  persists  in  the  bigoted  determination  to  sustain  his  originally-invented  nonsense.  But, 
avoiding  the  issues  he  had  already  made,  he  starts  afresh  upon  entirely  untenable  grounds,  and 
with  a  totally  different  line  of  argument,  to  prove  what  "Burnham  did,"  and  "  Burnham  didn't," 
in  the  years  ago.  To  which  latest  rodomontade,  by  Wright,  entirely  in  the  old  vein,  I  will  simply 
here  apply  the  trite  but  truthful  apothegm, —  "  false  in  one,  false  in  all."  — G.  P.  B. 


BURN  HAM   VS.    WRIGHT.  157 

We  shall  find  that  the  so-stated  "  importation  from.  India M  of  the  Cor- 
nish-sailor gray  fowls  has  no  foundation  in  fact;  and  though  the  young 
birds,  shown  at  the  early  exhibitions  in  Boston,  were  very  good  specimens, 
there  can  be  no  doubt  (as  there  exists  no  evidence  to  the  contrary)  that  all 
the  Light-Gray  samples  exhibited  in  1850,  '51,  J52, —  as  the  Committees  of 
Judges  at  Boston  declare  officially,  —  came  out  of  the  same  original  stock,  and 
that  this  u  large  pair  of  gray  fowls,"  said  by  the  sailor  to  have  been  "  found " 
by  him  in  New  York,  or  elsewhere,  were  hatched  from  eggs  sent  previously 
from  my  yards,  or  were  sold  by  me  to  some  unknown  party,  as  chickens ; 
which  chanced  to  develop  into  a  fine  pair  of  birds  in  the  hands  of  the  person 
who  thus  obtained  them.  Or,  they  might  have  come  from  Pennsylvania,  as 
mine  did  in  the  first  instance  —  from  Dr.  Kerr. 

As  to  the  first  letter  signed  by  Virgil  Cornish,  dated  March  2,  1852,  I  will 
add  here  that  I  am  ready  to  take  oath  that  Dr.  John  C.  Bennett  came  to  my 
house  and  passed  the  night  there,  a  few  months  previously  to  the  date  of  that 
document,  when  he  exhibited  to  me  and  to  members  of  my  family  his  ready 
prepared  account  of  what  was  "  shortly  to  be  forthcoming  as  the  true  history 
of  the  origin  and  importation  of  the  Brahmapootra  fowls,  from  India,*'  which 
precious  document  (as  nearly  as  I  can  now  recollect  it),  in  his  handwriting, 
was  almost  word  for  word  this  very  letter,  published  in  1852  as  Mr.  Cornish's  ! 
During  the  Doctor's  visit  to  me  that  day  and  night,  at  Melrose,  he  informed 
me  that  this  very  statement  was  to  be  published,  and  that  it  would  be  ap- 
proved by  Mr.  Cornish  and  Mr.  Hatch  of  Connecticut.  He  then  took  up  a 
proof  I  had  of  the  illustration  of  his  original  three  "Brahmapootra"  fowls, 
the^rs^  ever  shown  in  the  world,  which  may  be  seen  on  page  20  of  this  vol- 
ume (which  block  was  engraved  twenty-four  years  ago,  and  which  wood-cut 
I  have  the  original  of  now  in  my  possession),  and  upon  the  margin  of  said 
proof  he  wrote  these  words:  " Remove  streamers,  make  the  two  pullets 
larger,  no  feathers  on  legs  • "  which  directions  were  addressed  by  Dr.  Ben- 
nett to  the  artist  who  made  the  drawing,  for  the  purpose  of  republishing  this 
cut  to  suit  his  ideas,  then,  of  the  "Brahrnapootras  "  he  wished  to  delineate. 
The  above  memoranda,  in  Bennett's  own  hand-writing  upon  that  proof,  I  have 
still  in  my  hands.  The  "streamers,"  as  the  Doctor  called  them,  referred  to 
the  slight  top-knots  which  appear  (see  engraving)  at  the  back  of  the  heads 
of  all  three  of  these  original  "  Brahmapooters." 


158 


THE  CHINA   FOWL. 


PKO 


AND 


CON. 


Extracts  from  Wright's  Two  Poultry  Books. 

"  The  Brahma  Fowl  was  unquestionably  first  in- 
troduced into  England  as  late  as  the  year  1852, 
when  two  pens  were  shown  at  Birmingham  by 
Mrs.  Hozier  Williams  and  Dr.  Gwynne.  It  was 
said  this  fowl  was  a  new  breed,  imported  from  In- 
dia."—  Wright's  "  Brahma  Fowl." 

"  Mr.  Burnham,  of  the  United  States,  who,  it 
will  be  remembered,  sent  over  some  of  the  earliest 
so-called  ■  Brahmas '  as  a  present  to  Her  Majesty, 
in  18^2,  affirms  that  he  originated  them."  —  From 
the  "  Brahma  Fowl "  by  Lewis  Wright. 

"  The  first  exhibition  of  light  Brahma  chickens 
took  place  in  Boston,  in  October,  1850,  and  were 
those  of  Dr.  J.  C.  Bennett.  This  pen  was  con- 
sidered magnificent ;  and  Dr.  Bennett's  own  state- 
ment was  that  he  purchased  them  previously  at  a 
very  high  figure  from  Mr.  V.  Cornish,  of  Conn."  — 
"  Brahma  Fowl"  again. 

"Mr.  Chamberlin,  of  Connecticut,  sent  a  sailor 
to  New  York,  who  reported  that  he  found  a  pair 
of  Light-Gray  fowls,  which  he  purchased.  The 
man  in  New  York,  whose  name  we  have  not  got, 
gave  no  account  of  their  origin,  except  that  they 
came  over  in  the  India  ships."  "  These  were  said 
to  be  originally  imported  from  India."  —  "Brah- 
ma Fowl,"  pp.  9  and,  16. 

"Dr.  Bennett  stated  (in  1850)  that  he  pur- 
chased his  first  fowls  of  Mr.  Cornish ;  and  a  por- 
tion of  Mr.  Cornish's  account,  not  quoted  in  his 
first  published  letter  (about  these  fowls),  states 
that  '  Chamberlin  (of  whom  Cornish  got  his  chick- 
ens) brought  his  fowls  into  Connecticut  in  the 
early  part  o/1849.'"  .  .  .  "  I  give  below  all  the 
facts  (Nov.  9,  1869,)  relating  to  the  early  history  of 
the  Brahmapootra  fowls.  .  .  .  Mr.  Chamberlin's 
name  was  Nelson  H.  The  ship  arrived  in  New 
York  in  September,  1846.  The  name  of  the  port 
from  which  the  ship  sailed  was  Luckipoor,  in  In- 
dia. '  I  bought  the  first  brood  hatched  out,  in  Au- 
gust, and  the  old  pair  in  April  following.'  The 
Brahmas  were  first  exhibited  in  Boston  as  *  Gray 
Chittagongs,'  in  1850.  The  name  was  then  es- 
tablished." This  is  Mr.  Cornish's  statement, 
and  is  "the  only  account  consistent  with  the 
facts  and  itself,  which  is  seen  to  be  corroborated 
in  every  possible  way." —  Wright's  "  Origin  of 
the  Brahma,"  pp.  17,  140,  and  143. 

"  So  far  as  positive  evidence  is  concerned,  it  must 
be  considered  decisively  the  fact  that  Burnham's 
account  is  a  deception,  ,while  Mr.  Cornish's  is  cor- 
rect ;  and  that  all  the  genuine  '  Brahmas '  were 
bred  from  the  original  pair  first  brought  into  Con- 
necticut by  Mr.  Chamberlin ! "  (  When  ?  in  1849  ? 
in  1846?  or  in  1847?)  —  Wright's  "  Brahma 
Fowl,"  pp.  20,  21. 


Extracts  from  other  Poultry  AuthoritieSi 

"  The  clearness  of  the  white,  and  the  well-defined 
markings  of  the  two  contributions  shown  at  Bir- 
mingham, attracted  attention.  A  few  Weeks  after, 
some  of  these  birds,  sent  over  on  speculation  by 
Dr.  J.  C.  Bennett,  were  shown  in  Baker  Street." 
—  3fiss  Watts'  London  "  Poultry  Yard." 

"  I  never  sent  over  to  Her  Majesty  any  so-called 
'Brahmas,' early  or  late.  I  never  said  I  did.  I 
never  pretended  I  did;  and  no  one,  save  Lewis 
Wright,  has  ever  said,  or  pretended,  I  did!" — ' 
G.  P.  Burnham,  in  all  the  Poultry  journals. 

"  The  Brahmas  were  first  exhibited  in  Boston  by 
Mr.  Hatch,  of  Connecticut,  as  •  Gray  Chittagongs,' 
in  1850.  I  declined  exhibiting,  then.  I  preferred 
to  test  them  further.  I  sold  no  birds  to  any  one 
until  December,  1850.  I  sold  them  at  first  at  $12 
per  pair."  —  Virgil  Cornish,  Connecticut,  in  letter 
dated  Nov.  9,  1869. 

"  There  is  not  a  particle  of  evidence  to  show  that 
these  fowls  came  from  India!  The  banks  of  the 
Brahmapootra  River  have  long  been  in  possession 
of  the  British,  and  no  such  fowls  were  ever  seen  in 
that  locality.  In  fact,  the  Brahmas  originated  not 
in  India,  but  in  America" — [They  were  first 
brought  to  public  notice  by  Mr.  Burnham.]  —  "the 
two  varieties." —  Tegetmeier's  Poultry  Book,  p.  55. 

"  Mr.  Cornish  being  the  first  who  has  seen  fit  to 
publish  a  '  history,'  of  the  Brahmas,  and  having 
therein  made  statements  not  easily  proven,  I  shall 
take  the  liberty  of  criticising  his  account.  I  am 
unable  to  gather  from  those  who  first  owned  them 
in  this  county,  positive  evidence  concerning  their 
nativity.  Some  have  asserted  that  they  were  ori- 
ginally from  Chittagong;  others  name  the  Bur- 
rampooter  Valley,  India,  as  their  natural  home; 
and  Mr.  Cornish,  in  a  later  account,  says  they 
came  from  a  port  called  '  Luckipoor,'  up  the  Bur- 
rampooter  River;  none  of  which  statements  are 
proven  to  be  authentic.  If  Mr.  Cornish  had  stated 
that  they  were  a  '  lucky  hit,'  I  should  have  agreed 
with  him.  Mr.  Cornish  relates  that  Mr..  Hatch,  of 
Hamden,  Conn.,  exhibited  Brahmas  in  1850,  in 
Boston.  Mr.  Hatch  resided  in  Franklin  at  that 
time,  and  the  date  of  his  first  exhibition  was  in 
1851  (not  1850).  Mr.  Cornish,  in  all  his  state- 
ments to  Mr.  Wright,  goes  back  one  year  earlier 
than  he  ought  to."  —  C.  C.  Plaisted,  in  1874. 

"  The  first  pair  of  these  fowls,  about  which  there 
has  been  so  much  discussion,  were  brought  by  one 
Charles  Knox  to  Mr.  Nelson  H.  Chamberlin,  in. 
Hartford,  Conn.,  in  1847-  They  were  first  bred 
by  Mr.  Chamberlin  in  1848*  Mr.  Knox  reported 
them  just  arrived  on  an  East  India  vessel,  at  New 
York."  —  C.  C.  Plaisted's  (Bennett's  partner)  ac- 
count, in  1874. 


PRO  AND    CON. 


159 


"  It  appears,  both  from  the  statements  of  private 
correspondence  and  from  the  various  papers  of  the 
period,  that  the  first  public  exhibition  of  Light 
Brahmas  took  place  in  Boston,  in  1850.  They 
were  chickens,  and  were  shown  by  Dr.  Bennett,  of 
G.  eat  Falls,  N.H."  —  "  Brahma  Fowl,"  p.  17. 

"  This  pen  (shown  by  Dr.  Berrnett,  in  October, 
1S50,)  was  considered  magnificent  in  every  way, 
and  was  the  principal  attraction  of  the  show.  The 
question  at  once  occurred,  from  whom  did  Dr. 
Bennett  procure  these  birds?  And  it  is  impos- 
sible to  doubt  his  own  statement,  made  in  answer 
to  every  inquiry,  that  '  he  purchased  them  from 
Mr.  Cornish,  of  Connecticut.'  "  —  Wright's  "  Ori- 
gin of  Brahma,"  p.  17. 

"  Mr.  P.  Jones  states  the  fact  in  '  The  Cottage 
Gardener,'  of  a  pair  of  Gray  chickens  he  bought, 
breeding  silver  cinnamon  offspring,-  a  sure  sign  of 
crossing;  while  the  pure  unmixed  stock,  obtained 
from  Dr.  Bennett,  who  had  his  from  Mr.  Cornish, 
invariably  bred  pure  gray."  ..."  While  this  pur- 
est strain  of  Brahmas  have  thrown  pure  chickens 
only,  we  know  that  the  produce  of  imported  birds 
of  equally  high  pretensions  (Burnham's)  have 
produced  Buff  chickens." — Lewis  Wright's  altered 
quotation,  page  241,  "  Illustrated  Book  of  Poultry ." 

"  All  the  facts  strongly  corroborate  Mr.  Cornish's 
account,  proving  that  Connecticut  was  the  head- 
quarters, of  this  breed,  and  that  from  the  very  first 
it  bred  with  extreme  purity  as  regards  all  the 
characteristics."  .  .  .  "Mr.  Burnham  visited  this 
IS  ew- England  show  in  1850,  and  endeavored  to 
purchase  some  of  this  '  Brahma '  stock,  but  failed." 

—  Wright's  "Brahma  Fowl," p.  18. 

"We  have  thus  two  very  definite  statements  by 
Mr.  Burnham :  first,  that  he  teas  the  founder,  or 
original  breeder  of '  Brahmas ; '  and  secondly,  that 
the  Light  variety  were  pure,  uncrossed  Gray  Co- 
chins." —  Wright's  "  Origin  of  the  Brahma  Fowl," 
in  1870,  p.  12. 

"  All  Mr.  Burnham's  early  Brahmas  were  single- 
combed,  while  the  originals  (Cornish's)  were  all 
triple,  or  •  pea-combed.'  The  pea-comb  alone  is 
almost  conclusive  evidence  of  the  superior  an- 
tiquity or  parity  of  the  Brahma  fowl." —  Wright's 
"Illustrated  Poultry  Book," p.  247. 

"  The  comb  known  as  the  '  pea-comb,'  is  pe- 
culiar. Jso  pure  strain  ought  to  breed  a  solitary 
comb  in  which  this  peculiar  triple  character  is  not 
perfectly  distinct.  I  would  not  press  a  fancy  point 
too  far;  but,  considering  how  typical  the  pea-comb 
is,  I  would  not  breed  from  an  imperfect  one,  &c." 

—  Wright's  "  Poultry  Book,"  p.  240,  and  last  Lon- 
don edition  of"  Brahma  Fowl." 

"  Mr.  Jos.  Hinton  commenced  with  the  pure  Light 
Cornish-Chamberlin  stock;  and  in  three  years' 
breeding  he  transformed  his  strain  from  Light  to 
Dark;  producing,  from  these  Light  Chamberlin 


"  Mr.  S.  O.  Hatch,  of  Connecticut,  first  exhibited 
these  fowls  in  November,  1851-  An  erroneous 
statement  has  been  made  in  nearly  all  the  leading 
poultry  books  and  papers,  that  the  Light  Brahmas 
Avere  first  shown  at  the  exhibition  in  Boston,  in 
1850."—  C.  C.  Plaisted,  in  1874. 

"  This  is  the  trio  Mr.  Wright  has  mentioned  a3 
1  the  first  pure-bred  Brahmas  exhibited  at  Boston.' 
They  were  a  cross,  and  not  of  the  Chamberlin 
stock.  They  were  light  gray;  had  top-knots,  and 
attracted  much  attention.  But  this  was  in  1851, 
November.  At  this  show  (1851)  Mr.  Hatch  gave 
us  the  first  sight  at  pure-bred  Chamberlin  Brah- 
mas."—  C.  C.  Plaisted,  in  the  Hartford  "  Poultry 
World,"  1874. 

"  My  friend,  Dr.  Bennett,  consulted  me  as  to  a 
name  for  a  brace  of  Gray  fowls  I  saw  in  his  yard, 
in  1851.  He  entered  these  at  our  Boston  show 
that  year,  as  '  Bramapootras.'  These  fowls  were 
bred  by  him  from  my  first  (Dr.  Kerr)  Gray  Shang- 
hae  cock,  which  I  sold  the  doctor,  and  a  Light-Drab 
(or  silver  cinnamon)  Shanghae  hen,  in  Massachu- 
setts.^  Subsequently  these  fowls  came  to  be  called 
'  Burram  Pootras,'  •  Brahmapootras,'  and  finally 
Brahmas."  —  Burnham's  " Xew  Pou'try  Book" 
1870,  p.  159,  quoted  from  another  work  in  1855. 

"  The  Light  Brahmas  undoubtedly  originated  in, 
and  were  identical  with,  those  Gray  fowls  (Burn- 
ham's) that  from  the  very  first  came  over  from 
Shanghae,  with  the  Buff  and  Partridge  birds  now 
universally  known  as  '  Cochins,'  and  here  we  ap- 
pend Mr.  "Burnham's  account  of  them,  from  his 
amusing  "History  of  the  Hen  Fever." — Teget- 
meiers'  Poultry  Book,  London,  1867. 

"I  never  had  claimed  to  be  the  'founder,'  or 
'originator,'  of  any  'Brahmas.'  I  simply  said  I 
was  the  first  breeder  of  the  '  Gray  Shanghaes  '  in 
America  (never '  Cochins '),  such  as  I  sent  to  the 
Queen  in  1852,"  &c. —  G.  P.  Burnham,  in  all  the 
Poultry  papers,  1S74. 

"  The  single  comb  would  appear  to  be  the  usu  il 
form  of  that  feature  in  the  Brahmapootra  fowl ; 
though,  as  Dr.  Bennett  says,  '  the  true  breed  do 
sometimes  present  this  deviation  of  the  pea-comb.' " 
(Sometimes !)— R<  v.  Mr.  Wingfield's  Poultry  Book, 
p.  170;  published  in  1853. 

"  Upon  this  point,  I  can  only  say  that  out  of 
twenty  chicks  bred  for  myself  from  a  cock  and  two 
pullets  obiained  from  Dr.  Bennett,  of  the  United 
States  (of  the  Light  Cornish-Chamberlin  stock),/ 
cannot  detect  a  single  instance  of  the  'deviation' 
from  the  single  combs  upon  the  parents,  received 
from  Dr.  Bennett."—/.';*.  Wni.  C.  Gwynne,  Eng- 
land, to  Rev.  Mr.  Wingfield,  in  1850. 

"  Mr.  P.  H.  Bowman's  chickens,  of  Posemoran, 
which  he  bought  of  Mrs.  Hozier  Williams,"  sent 
to  her  in  England  by  Dr.  Bennett  &  Co.,  in  1S52, 
out  of  the  Caamberlin  stock,  "  are  of  uniform 


160 


THE   CHINA   FOWL.' 


birds,  his  famous  well-known  Dark  Brahma  cock, 
for  two  years  a  leading  English  prize  bird  known  as 
'  Champion,'  and  the  Da  k  hens  as  we  see  them 
now,"  the  most  notable  strain  of  Dark  Brahmas 
to-day  in  all  England!  —Lewis  Wright's  new  "  Il- 
lustrated Poultry  Book,-"  1873,  '74. 

"  I  did  notice  the  pea-comb  on  my  first  birds.  It 
was  not  so  with  all ;  yet  it  appeared  different  from 
the  Chittagong.  TJiere  was  a  tendency  to  throw 
dark  chickens,  but  a  greater  tendency  to  become 
lighter.  All  fowls  having  dark  and  light  feathers 
can  be  varied  either  way,  to  darker  or  lighter,  by 
choosing  always  the  darkest  or  lightest  for  breed- 
ers. I  never  bred  to  either  extreme." —  Virgil 
Cornish's  second  letter,  "  Bruhma  Fowl,"  p.  143. 

"  The  statement  that  the  two  varieties  of  Brah- 
mas (Light  and  Dark)  had  '  distinct  origins,'  is 
known  to  every  breeder  of  these  fowls  to  be  un- 
true. Miss  Watts,  whose  (Chamberlin's)  strain  is 
probably  the  only  English  one  that  has  not  been 
crossed,  assured  us,  in  the  most  distinct  manner, 
that  she  never  had  but  the  one  stock,  from  which, 
by  selection,  she  has  bred  both  the  Dark  and  the 
Light "  varieties.  —  Wright's  latest  work,  p.  246.  — 
"  Illustrated  Book  of  Poultry." 

"  We  have  found  in  our  own  yards  that  we  could 
soon  breed  black  'Brahmas,' if  such  were  desired; 
or,  on  the  other  hand,  that  in  about  three  seasons, 
by  choosing  the  lightest  birds,  we  could  produce 
almost  clear  white.  And  as  the  original  birds 
(Burnham's,  of  course,)  were  somewhat  darker 
than  the  Light  birds  now  shown,  either  color  could 
have  been  bred  from  them  (the  originals)  with  still 
greater  rapidity  and  ease."  .  .  .  "  Burnham  claims 
for  his  the  credit  of  being  the  original  birds,*  and 
unfortunately  found  in  England  what  he  never 
could  in  America,  a  writer  who  would  adopt  his 
tale."— Wright's  Illustrated  "Poultry  Book," 
1873,  p.  247. 

^  •'  As  an  instance  of  the  general  appreciation  of 
this  man,  we  had  recently  an  announcement  from 
a  valued  American  correspondent  that  '  our  old 
friend,  Burnham,  has  let  himself  out  again ; '  and 
were  somewhat  perplexed  by  this  enigmatical  in- 
formation, until  the  receipt  of  '  Burnham's  New 
Poultry  Book,'  published  in  1871.  It  is  the  simple 
fact,  that  not  one  American  writer,  and  but  one 
English,  ever  regarded  Burnham's  accounts  as  of 
any  value."  ..."  Whether  the  latter  may  have 
bred  very  tolerable  imitations  of  Brahmas,  is  not 
the  question.  We  had  seen  that  there  were  two 
qualities  of  birds  known  in  the  early  days  —  one 
spurious,  which  bred  mongrel  progeny,  and  could 
be  traced  to  Burnham;  the  other  pure,  which  was 
always  traced  to  Connecticut,  or  to  Dr.  Bennett, 
who  procured  his  from  that  State." 


*  I  did  enter  my  claim,  in  the  early  days  (long  before  Mr. 
Lewis  Wright  began  to  seek  for  means  to  abuse  and  cry  down 
my  fowls,  which  were  so  justly  popular  in  England),  as  the 
"originator"  of  the  Gray  Shanghae  stock,  wfiich  1  sent  to 
Her  Majesty  the  Queen,  and  others,  in  England,  as  well  as 
all  over  the  United  States,  as  such.  I  did  not  claim  toori- 
ginate,  breed  or  sell,  own  or  keep,  any  "  Brahmapootras  " 
m  those  years.  nd  ti';ue  know  »his  fact  better  than  do 
Maso.i  C.  Weld  ani  Lewis  Wngut!  —  g.  p.  b. 


color  —  a  dusky  gray,  striped  with  black  on  head, 
neck,  and  back."  Dr.  Bennett  wrote  to  Dr. 
Gwynne  in  1852,  that  "his  fowls  and  Air.  Burn- 
ham's were  precisely  similar,  and  both  were  bred 
from  the  same  stock"  (the  Gray  Shanghaes).— 
Rev.  Mr.  Wiagfield's  Book,  1853. 

"  Among  Americans,  Mr.  Burnham  says,  these 
fowls  are  Shanghaes.  Dr.  Bennett  (and  Cornish) 
contends  that  they  came  from  India.  One  says 
the  pea-comb  is  decidedly  preferable ;  the  others 
say  it  should  be  sing'e,  upright,  and  well  ser- 
rated. This  '  pea-comb '  is  a  novelty  with  us  in 
England;  and,  in  all  our  various  crosses,  we  have 
never  seen  anything  like  this." — Tegetmeier's 
London  Illustrated  Poultry  Book,  1867. 

"Mr.  Burnham's  Light  Brahmas,  with  pure 
white  or  cream-colored  bodies,  and  elegantly  pen- 
cilled hackles,  were  in  great  favor  "  (at  the  Bir- 
mingham Show,  in  '53),  "when  suddenly  a  new 
variety  sprang  upon  the  scene.  A  pair  of  birds  from 
Mr.  Burnham  were  shown  there  by  Mr.  Baily  of 
London,  and  sold  for  100  guineas !  They  were  Dark 
gray  in  color,  and  were  the  first '  Dark  Brahmas  ' 
ever  seen  in  this  country."  —  W-  B.  Tegetmeier, 
Editor  of  "London  Field,"  in  1853. 

The  Dark  Brahmas  sent  out  to  England  first 
by  Mr.  Burnham,  in  1853,  "  at  once  took  the  lead  of 
all  others,  and  many  fanciers  in  England  were 
supplied.  But,  wishing  to  '  improve '  them,  if  pos- 
sible, in  size  and  color,  these  old  sagacious  breed- 
ers crossed  the  hens  with  the  black  breasted 
Dorking,  the  only  bird  which  would  give  the 
qualities  desired.  A  gentleman  who  visited  those 
old  establishments,  a  few  years  after  the  first  birds 
were  sent  there  from  the  United  States  (Burn- 
ham's), was  in  time  to  detect  this  cross;  and  at 
once  observed  the  change  in  size,  the  black  breast, 
and  actually  saw  the  fifth  toe."  —  Mark  Pitman, 
in  "New  York  Poxiltry  Bulletin,"  in  1870. 

"Our  readers  will  find  a  contribution  in  this 
week's  '  Fancier's  Journal,'  over  the  signature  of 
S.  J.  Bestor,  Esq.,  the  well-known  fancier  and 
writer  —  on  '  Wright  vs.  Burnham?  Mr.  Bestor  is 
a  gentleman,  a  well-known  old  breeder,  of  Hart- 
ford, Conn.,  and  well  read;  for  two  years  presi- 
dent of  the  Connecticut  State  Poultry  Society." 

Wade's  Philadelphia  Fancier,  June  26,  referring 
to  the  following  article :  — 

"  I  am  not  personally  acquainted  with  Mr.  Burn- 
ham, never  having  met  him ;  but  have  read  all  of 
his  works,  and  especially  his  later  contributions  to 
the  press.  He  shows  very  clearly  that  no  ship  '  ar- 
rived at  New  York  from  Luckipoor,  in  India,' 
either  in  1846  or  in  1849,  as  is  claimed;  and  it 
does  strike  me  that  Mr.  Wright  has  seriously  erred 
in  his  theory  about  the  origin  of  the  now  so-called 
■  Brahmas ;'  and  he  has  plainly  made  a  gross  mis- 
take in  his  attempts  to  argue  Mr.  Burnham  out  of 
the  deserved  credit  of  originating  this  stock  in 
America,  and  of  being  the  first  to  introduce  it  into 
England,  of  both  Light  and  Dark  varieties. 
Wright  went  a  long  stretch  out  of  his  way  to  im- 
plicate Mr.  Burnham  in  Brahmapootraism.  Mr. 
Burnham  has  recently  completely  vindicated  him- 


PRO  AND  CON. 


161 


"But  such,  and  accounts  of  such,  published 
after  the  pure  Brahmas  were  publicly  shown,  can- 
not invalidate  a  consistent  account  given  from  the 
very  first  of  the  genuine  strain,  as  Mr.  Cornish 
justly  argues.  It  is  plain  that  there  was  a  strain 
of  real  Brahmas  distinct  from  Shanghaes,  or  the 
fowls  then  known  in  America  as  Chittagongs,  all 
which  were  traced  up  to  the  birds  brought  into 
Connecticut  by  Mr.  Chamberlin."  .  .  .  "And  as  an 
aged  East  Indian  officer  writes  us  recently,  that 
1  this  fowl  was  the  Chittagong  breed,  of  which  he 
had  seen  hundreds  in  India.'  .  .  .  Mr.  Cornish's 
stock  might,  of  course,  have  been  Shanghaes  as 
much  as  Burnham's  were.  We  have  seen  that  the 
Dark  Brahma  can  be  bred  from  the  Light  —  or, 
rather  the  Gray  !  And  on  this  and  other  evidence, 
we  contend  that  the  fowl  is  of  one  race.  .  .  .  We 
assert  that  all  the  evidence  we  have,  traces  this 
fowl  back  to  Mr.  Cornish's  stock,  and  all  the  facts 
harmonize  with  this  theory." —  Wright's  "Brahma 
Fowl,"  last  London  edition. 

4®=  "A  portion  of  Mr.  Cornish's  letter  of  1852, 
not  quoted  in  the  '  Poultry  Yard,'  (at  first)  states 
that  Chamberlin  brought  his  fowls  into  the  State 
(Connecticut)  in  the  early  part  of  1849."  — 
Wright's  "  Brahma  Fowl"  p.  17. 

4®=  "  The  name  of  the  port  from  which  the  ship 
sailed,  with  these  fowls  on  board,  is  Luckipoor,  in 
India.  The  ship  arrived  in  New  York,  in  Septem- 
ber, 1846.  The  first  brood  I  purchased." —  Cor- 
nish's second  letter,  1809,  p.  143,  same  work. 

4j@=  "  The  first  pair  of  ihese  fowls  were  brought 
by  one  Charles  Knox  to  Mr.  Chamberlin,  in  Hart- 
ford, Conn.,  in  1847.  Mr.  Knox  reported  two 
pairs,  on  an  East-India  vessel,  at  New  York." 
—  The  latest  account,  by  C.  C.  Plaisted,  in  1874. 

"  The  Brahma  and  the  Shanghae  (Cochin)  fowl 
being  confessedly  closely-related  races,  it  is  inter- 
esting to  estimate  their  relative  antiquity.  The 
pea-comb  has  been  found  on  the  Malay,  and  on 
the  China  fowl.  The  importance  of  this  matter, 
with  regard  to  the  whole  subject  of  the  origin  of 
this  species,  must  be  our  apology  for  devoting  so 
much  space  to  it."  .  .  .  "While  it  is  possible  the 
'Dark'  birds,  which  came  over  in  the  ship  *u:ith 
those  here  recorded,  may  have  also  been  Brahmas, 
-there  is  not  the  slightest  reason  to  question  that 
both  may  have  been  derived  from  the  one  stock 
brought  into  Connecticut  by  Chamberlin,  and 
afterwards  fostered  by  Cornish  and  Dr.  Ben- 
nett ! ! !  " —  Wright's  "  Brahma  Foiol." 

"  Chamberlin's  name  is  Nelson  H."  says  Cornish. 
"  I  purchased  his  first  brood,  hatched  in  August, 
1847,  and  the  old  pair  the  April  following."  This 
testimony,  so  full  and  explicit,  must  be  considered 
finally  to  settle  the  question.  Mr.  Cornish's  direct 
and  explicit  evidence  is  the  strongest  point  in  this 
case.  .  .  .  "  I  will  only  say  that  the  difficulty  in  my 
mind  is,  the  plain,  definite,  accurate  statements  of 
Mr.  Virgil  Cornish,  on  this  subject."  —  Lewis 
Wright  in  "  Brahmi  Fowl"  and  in  a  letter  to  G. 
P.  Burnham  in  May,  1874. 


self  against  the  wholesale  attack  of  Mr.  Wright, 
who,  evidently,  is  not  as  •  F.  R.  W.'  has  it,  '  the 
best  living  authority  upon  this  Brahma  question,' 
however  good  he  may  have  been  on  other  poultry 
matters.  As  to  the  sailor's  tale  about  the  '  importa- 
tion '  of  Cornish's  stock  '  from  Luckipoor,  in  In- 
dia,' Mr.  Burnham  effectually  disposes  of  that — 
since  no  record  of  this  ship's  arrival  in  New  York 
is  to  be  found ;  which  it  could  now  be  readily,  upon 
the  old  United  States  Customs  Register,  had  it 
occurred  either  in  1846  or  in  1849.  The  result 
of  all  is,  undoubtedly,  that  all  these  '  large  Light- 
Gray  Fowls '  come  from  one  parentage ;  and  there 
is  no  question  in  my  mind  to-day,  that  Mr.  Burn- 
ham had  the  first  old  birds  in  the  United  States,  to 
wit :  those  he  imported  in  1849  and  1850,  from 
Shanghae;  and  that  this  splendid  stock  (now  im- 
proved by  long  domestication  among  us)  was 
originally  of  Chinese,  and  not  of  Lndia  origin,  a3 
Mr.  Tegetmeier  so  clearly  states." — S.  J.  Bestor, 
in  Wade's  Philadelphia  Fancier,  June,  1874. 

"  Mr.  Cornish  first  announces  in  Wright's  book 
that  his  fowls  came  into  Connecticut  from  the 
sailors  of  the  India  ships,  in  1849.  On  pages  142, 
143,  same  work,  appears  Cornish's  second  letter 
(Nov.  9,  1869),  stating  that  his  fowls  arrived  in  a 
ship  from  Luckipoor,  India,  at  New  York,  Sep- 
tember, 1846.  In  June,  1874,  Mr.  Plaisted  says, 
these  fowls  came  into  Connecticut  from  an  East 
India  ship,  just  then  arrived  at  New  York,  in 
1847.  In  1870, 1  went  to  New  York,  and  carefully 
searched  the  United  States  Customs  Records  for 
this  ship;  and  I  now  positively  state  that  there  is 
no  entry  of  any  such  ship  to  be  found  there  — 
either  in  1849,  1846,  or  1847."—  G.  P.  Burn- 
ham, in  "  Turf,  Field,  and  Farm"  June  26,  1874. 

"  Mr.  Burnham  clearly  points  us  away  back  to 
Dr.  Kerr's  letters,  in  1849,  in  support  of  his  claim 
to  the  origin  of  the  Gray  Shanghaes  —  now  called 
'  Brahmas ; '  and  there  can  no  longer  be  any  doubt, 
from  all  the  evidence  before  the  public,  that  these 
Light-Gray  Fowls  had  a  common  origin  in  this 
country;  and  that  they  have  been,  since  1850, 
'51,  '52,  variously  named  by  different  parties  to 
suit  their  own  tastes.  We  will  add  that,  as  far 
back  as  in  1855,  '56,  we  ourselves  bred  these  fowls 
in  Massachusetts.  They  were  then  known  as 
'Gray  Shanghaes,'  or  'Chittagongs,'  and,  as  we 
recollect  them,  they  were  certainly  identical  with 
the  Light  Brahmas  of  to-day."  —  Editor  Fanciers' 
Journal,  Philadelphia,  in  1S74. 

"  I  would  ask  what  Cornish's  accounts  are  worth, 
from  first  to  last  ?  I  do  not  consider  his  stories  worth 
one  pin,  after  investigating  the  subject  as  I  have. 
There  is  nothing  accurate  in  his  first  statement, 
and  his  last  one  is  still  worse.  Mr.  Cornish  did 
not  purchase  Mr.  Chamberlin's  first  brood  of  chick- 
ens, neither  did  he  ever  own  the  old  '  first  pair'  of 
those  fowls  at  any  time,  as  I  can  prove  to  the  sat- 
isfaction of  the  most  incredulous." —  C.  C.  Plaisted 
in  his  Brahma  History,  Hartford  "  Poultry 
World,"  1874. 


*"Dark  birds  which  came  over,"  in  w7iat  ship?  The  one  that  "arrived  at  New  York,"  in  1849?  or  1846?  or  in 
184T?  There  was  no  a  ich  ship  arrived  from  India  as  is  claimed  by  Wright  —  in  either  year  —  with  either  "Dark 
birds."  or  Light!  "The  Brahmas  originated  not  in  India,"  says  Mr.  Tegetmeier,  of  the  London"  Field,"  "but  with 
Mr.  G.  P.  Burnham,  in  America,"  both  varieties. 


162  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

Dr.  Bennett  wished  to  change  the  original  cut  of  his  three  birds,  and 
"  remove "  the  top-knots.  I  never  would  allow  this  block  to  be  touched. 
He  endeavored  still  to  enlist  me  in  his  "Brahmapootra"  scheme;  but  I 
steadily  declined,  and  strove  to  show  him  how  unreasonable  was  his  preten- 
sions about  this  Cornish-sailor  story  which  he  had  hatched  up ;  and  I  heard 
no  more  of  this  then  skilfully  prepared  yarn  (very  slightly  varied,  to "  the 
best  of  my  remembrance,  in  its  details),  until  it  was  first  made  public,  a  year 
or  more  subsequently  to  this  interview  between  us.  Dr.  John  C.  Bennett, 
himself,  prepared  this  sailor-story  in  the  main,  originally  •  he  alone  invented 
the  name  of  "  Brahmapootra  "  for  the  Gray-Shanghae  fowls ;  he  also  originated 
the  title  of  the  "  pea-comb."  The  other  parties  in  the  Brahmapootra  interest 
in  1852,  '53  joined  the  Doctor  in  this  story  and  the  deception  about  the  "  im- 
portation of  these  fowls  from  India"  —  under  his  lead,  —  and  subsequently 
told  his  tale  so  many  times,  that  some  of  them  (not  all ! )  came  at  last  to  be- 
lieve in  its  truth. 

I  have  now  upon  file  upwards  of  a  score  of  the  Doctor's  old  confidential 
letters,  from  which  I  could,  if  it  were  necessary,  quote  overwhelming  corrobo- 
rative "  testimony,"  written  by  his  hand,  in  support  of  the  above  declarations. 
But  John  C.  Bennett  is  in  his  grave.  He  was  my  intimate  friend  for  more 
than  twenty-five  years.  He  never  wrote  or  uttered  one  offensive  word  to,  or 
of,  me  or  mine,  to  my  knowledge.  He  possessed  first-class  natural  talents, 
was  liberally  educated,  and  proved  himself  a  genial,  companionable  man, 
thougb  he  was  a  sharp  competitor  in  the  chicken  fancy,  and  oftentimes  eccen- 
tric, reckless,  and  erratic  in  his  business  management.  But  I  have  nothing 
to  offer  derogatory  to  him ;  and  his  memory  will  hereafter  be  no  farther  criti- 
cised by  my  pen.  Were  he  alive  to-day,  he  would  cordially  indorse  what  I 
have  now  stated  —  as  I  have  the  means  of  knowing.     And  here  let  him  rest. 

If,  then,  this  mythical  "  one  pair  of  gray  fowls  "  were  not  "  imported,"  and 
there  does  not,  and  never  has  existed  down  to  this  day  the  slightest  particle 
of  real  evidence  that  they  ever  came  from  India  (as  Mr.  Tegetmeier  so  dis- 
tinctly averred  in  1867),  what  becomes  of  Mr.  Lewis  Wright's  elaborated  and 
long-spun  straining  to  prove  what  the  originators  of  this  foolish  story  first 
fabricated  ?  Of  what  mortal  use  is  all  this  reiterated  misrepresentation  — 
first  or  last  ?  What  has  Weld  gained  by  the  "firing  off  of  his  long  string 
of  questions  "  at  Cornish,  except  to  stultify  his  own  witness,  when  he  makes 
him  repeat  the  details  of  this  long-ago-played-out  falsity  ? 


BURNHAM  -VS.    WRIGHT.  163 

And  let  me  ask,  here,  Mr*  Wright,  where  you  first  got  your  "Dark 
Brahmas"  from,  in  Great  Britain  ?  Did  Mr.  Cornish,  Mr.  Chamber- 
lin,  Mr.  Plaisted,  Dr.  Bennett,  Mr.  Knox,  Mr.  Weld,  Mr.  Anybody,  except 
Mr.  Burnham  (whom  you  so  wantonly  vilify),  ever  send  to  England  any 
Dark  B  rah  mas,  that  you  ever  heard  of,  in  those  years  you  have  written 
about  so  flippantly  ?  Can  you  name  any  other  American  who  sent  to  Eng- 
land, from  1852  to  1861  (when  the  rebellion  broke  out  in  the  United  States), 
the  first  specimen  of  ''Dark  Brahma"  fowls  of  any  strain,  whatever?  No, 
sir !  You  can  not.  None  of  these  "  up-the-Brahm.apootra-B.iver  men  "  have 
ever  had  any  thing  to  say  about  the  Dark  Brahmas,  in  the  years  you  have 
written  of  so  disgracefully  in  your  two  late  books  ?  No  one  but  you,  Lewis 
Wright,  has  ever  undertaken  to  show  that  "both  the  Light  and  the  Dark 
varieties  may  have  been  derived  from  the  one  stock,"  or  that  "it  is  possible 
the  -  Dark ;  birds  which  came  over  in  the  ship  with  those  recorded  by  you,  may 
also  have  been  Brahmas  ! " 

You  know  very  well  that  no  one  ever  pretended  that  there  was  but  "  one 
gray  pair,  the  others  being  red  and  brown,"  brought  by  the  mythical  ship  into 
New  York.  But  there  was  no  such  ship  came  over,  as  you  and  they  claim  ! 
Therefore,  there  could  have  been  no  such  "  Brahmas,"  of  any  color.  And, 
least  of  all,  any  "  Dark  "  Gray  ones.  This  declaration  of  yours,  at  the  close 
of  your  book  on  the  origin  of  the  two  varieties  of  the  Brahmas,  simply  exposes 
your  wilful  ignorance  of  this  whole  subject.  I  originated  the  Dark  Brahma 
fowl  in  my  own  yard,  at  Melrose,  Mass.,  Lewis  !  You  ought  to  know  this,  for 
all  England  and  America  knows  it.  Nobody  ever  claimed  or  pretended  to  take 
precedence  of  me,  with  this  variety,  surely.  And  even  the  Cornish-Bennett 
men  have  never  set  up  any  theory  upon  this  point,  regarding  their  stock. 
The  Dark  Brahma,  or  Dark  "  Gray  Shanghae,"  is  my  patent,  Mr.  Wright. 
I  originated  it,  in  1853.  I  never  saw  them  till  that  year,  but  it  was  the  re- 
sult of  a  studied  experiment  of  mine;  and  I  raised  a  great  many  of  these  fine 
Dark  birds  in  the  succeeding  years.  Look  over  the  records,  and  see  if  you 
can  find  any  "Dark  Brahmas"  spoken  of — anywhere  on  earth  —  until  my 
first  splendid  trio  went  out  to  John  Baily  of  Mount  Street,  London,  in  1853. 
And  tell  me  too,  if,  subsequently,  at  any  time  before  the  war,  any  body  but 
G.  P.  Burnham  of  the  United  States  sent  to  England  one  single  specimen  of 
this  Dark  variety,  to  any  living  man.  You  can't  name  him,  Sir  !  He  doesn't 
exist.     Nobody  had  that  stock  but  myself,  in  all  those  years. 


164  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

Observe,  Lewis,  I  am  not  now  arguing  this  question.  I  am  stating  facts, 
simply.  And  "facts  are  stubborn  things,"  you  know.  I  make  no  mention 
of  what  "  might  have  been,"  or  what  was  "  possible."  I  tell  you  that  I  origi- 
nated, upon  my  premises,  the  fowl  known  from  the  outset  (in  this  "history" 
you  have  so  distorted  and  perverted)  as  the  "  Dark  Brahmas,"  in  the  year 
1853.  And  you  nor  no  other  man  living  can  go  behind,  or  before  me,  in  this 
matter,  as  the  record  clearly  shows.  No  one,  save  yourself,  has  ever  ques- 
tioned this.  No  American  breeder  has  ever  pretended  that  he  has  ever  bred 
Dark  birds  from  the  so-claimed  Cornish-Chamberlin-Bennett  stock.  From 
my  "Gray  Shanghae  "  fowls,  the  Light  and  Dark  birds  (in  my  own  way), 
I  produced  the  Dark  Brahmas  (so  called)  which  I  shipped  to  England,  and 
bred  hundreds  upon  hundreds  of,  subsequently,  which  I  sent  there  and  all 
over  this  country.  Your  people  have,  since  1864,  '65,  bred  some  fair  "Dark 
Brahmas,"  as  they  call  them;  but  never  a  pair  that  equalled  mine,  that  I 
have'  ever  yet  seen. 

And,  notwithstanding  all  this  truth,  which  you  must  have  been  cognizant 
of  when  you  penned  your  two  abusive  volumes,  you  give  me  no  credit  for 
having  done  in  this  business  what  no  man  else  has  ever  claimed  to  have 
done,  before  or  after  me  !  Is  this  justice  ?  Is  it  fair  ?  Is  it  generous  ?  Is 
it  honorable  ?  Is  this  kind  of  treatment  towards  a  man  you  never  saw,  and 
whom  you  can  know  nothing  of,  pursuing  a  manly  course  of  conduct  "  in  the 
fear  of  God  ?  "  It  may  be  so,  in  your  warped  opinion ;  but  _Z"  should  say  you 
penned  these  sentences  with  the  Fiend  at  your  elbow. 

How  did  I  do  this  ?  No  matter ;  I  did  it !  I  produced  a  strain  of  dark- 
plumed  birds  which  you,  in  England,  never  saw  until  I  sent  them  there,  and 
since  1858  and  '59  which  you  have  been  striving  to  imitate ;  but  which  you 
have  not  yet  succeeded  in  reproducing  like  the  originals,  because  you  have 
not  gone  about  your  experiments  in  the  right  way.  There  were  no  brown 
feathers  and  no  "  vulture  hock "  in  my  "  Dark  Brahma "  or  Dark-Gray 
Shanghae  blood ;  but  in  all  the  English  "  Dark  Brahmas  "  we  have  had 
here,  this  brown  feathering  and  hock  are  found  (to  a  greater  or  less  extent), 
in  every  bird,  male  or  female  that  I  have  examined,  which  has  come  from 
your  side  of  the  Atlantic  in  the  past  six  or  seven  years.  There  is  no  excep- 
tion to  the  cropping  out  of  this  defective  color  in  your  English  dark  birds  — 
cocks  and  hens  alike.     Therefore,  I  repeat  it,  you  don't  breed  them  aright. 


BURN II AM  VS.    WRIGHT.  165 

Turn  to  the  English  Dark  Cock,  page  86.  His  monstrous  tail  and 
fearful  hock  would  disqualify  him  at  once  under  the  scrutiny  of  an  Ameri- 
can expert !  We  have  attended  no  exhibition  in  the  last  five  years  where 
we  have  not  seen  scores  of  Dark  Brahma  cocks  that  would  heat  this  sam- 
ple, out  and  out,  —  supposing  it  to  be  a  likeness;  and  Weir  is  generally 
very  faithful  in  his  delineations,  as  we  all  know.  We  insert  the  picture, 
therefore,  more  by  way  of  warning,  than  otherwise;  and,  as  in  the  instance 
of  the  large  Light  Brahma  English  bird,  on  page  121,  we  say  emphatically, 
"none  of  these  styles  of  Brahmas  for  us."  They  are  not  the  thing  at  all. 
They  are  an  English  manufactured  bird,  altogether.  We  have  seen  numerous 
Dark  samples  that  have  been  "  imported  "  into  America  in  the  last  half-dozen 
years,  not  unlike  this,  —  with  the  exception  of  the  shockingly  deformed  tail, 
—  and  we  never  saw  one  of  them  yet,  in  the  body-plumage '  of  which  we 
could  not  detect  the  brown  or  bay  feathering  (to  a  greater  or  less  extent), 
which  comes  from  a  cross  with  the  Partridge  or  Dark-Cinnamon  Cochin  fowl, 
while  the  chickens  bred  from  these  English  importations,  invariably  upon 
the  pullets,  in  fluff,  saddles,  and  sides,  are  spotted  with  the  brown  or  foreign 
feathering;  and  the  young  cocks  bred  from  such  stock,  almost  as  invariably, 
are  similarly  blemished  in  plumage  upon  the  thighs  and  flanks.  The  pure 
steel-gray  (white  and  black)  of  my  originals  is  lost,  or  thus  clouded,  and 
American  purchasers  of  these  costly  birds  wonder  why  it  is  that  they  cannot 
get  good  colored  progeny  from  their  expensive  English  importations  !  It  is 
simply  because  they  don't  breed  them  there  as  they  were  at  first  bred ;  and 
as  they  can  only  be  bred,  in  their  purity.  In  reference  to  which  point,  Lewis 
Wright,  after  arguing  through  page  upon  page,  in  his  late  work,  in  favor  of 
this  true  color  test,  concludes  with  this  vagary :  "  Mr.  Teebay  strongly  dissents 
from  our  view,  and  believes  there  must  have  been  another  original  strain  (be- 
sides the  so-called  Cornish),  to  produce  the  dark  variety."  .  .  .  But  "  we 
think  little  of  this  '  color  ?  test ! "  A  final  announcement  by  Wright,  which 
will  unquestionably  be  fully  appreciated  by  American  fanciers,  who  know 
that  the  clean,  pure,  Sfceel-gray  Dark  Brahmas  have  never  been  bred  in  this 
country  from  any  strain  save  my  originals.  No  American  Light  Brahma 
breeder  to-day  claims  that  he  can  produce  the  dark  birds  from  what  is  called 
the  "  Cornish-Chamberlin  strain,"  though  Wright  states  that  this  has  been 
done  in  England.  I  deny  this,  too.  It  has  never  been  done,  and  it  cant  be 
clone,  with  the  light  stock  alone.     This  is  simply  impossible. 


166  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

In  continuation  of  what  he  knows  about  this  breed,  Mr.  Wright  says, 
"  Both  Dark  and  Light  varieties  of  the  Brahma  fowl  should  be  precisely  alike, 
in  size,  shape,  and  carriage  —  differing  only  in  color?  And  then,  to  prove  his 
opinion  that  both  varieties  come  out  of  one  parent-stock,  he' adds,  that  "Mr. 
Joseph  Hinton,  whose  experience  goes  back  to  the  early  days,  informs  us  that 
his  birds  were  originally  Light  Brahmas,  obtained  of  Dr.  Gwynne,  Dr.  Ben- 
nett, &  Co.  Later,  he  obtained  a  somewhat  darker  cock  from  J.  K.  Fowler 
(also  an  early  breeder),  from  which,  with  his  darkest  of  the  Light  hens,  he 
bred  a  most  beautiful  Dark  Brahma  cock,  and  hens  so  densely  dark  as  to  be 
nearly  black?  Which  latter  statement  merely  repeats  our  own  experience  ; 
since  Mr.  J.  K.  Fowler's  Dark  bird  mentioned,  I  am  quite  positive  went  to 
England  from  my  yard,  in  Melrose,  and  Dr.  Bennett  first  supplied  Dr.  Gwynne 
and  Mr.  Hinton  from  my  stock  direct,  I  know,  with  the  dark-Tplumed  birds. 

It  is  clear,  Mr.  Wright,  you  can  know  nothing  of  me,  except  through 
some  malicious  busybody  who  may  have  slandered  me.  And  I  repeat  it, 
I  am  at  a  loss  to  understand  why  you  should  have  thus  villainously  lam- 
pooned me.  For  four  years,  I  find  (since  your  first  volume  was  issued) 
I  have  remained  almost  in  ignorance  of  the  existence  of  this  libel !  I 
had  only  casually  heard  that  "Mr.  Wright  was  down  on  Mr.  Bur nh am  in 
his  Brahma  Fowl,"  and  never  gave  the  matter  a  thought  further;  till, 
in  the  month  of  May,  1874,  the  subject  was  forced  upon  my  notice  by  the 
publication  of  the  long  abusive  extract  from  your  books,  inserted  from  an 
anonymous  scribbler  in  a  Philadelphia  paper.  Since  then,  I  have  endeavored 
to  defend  myself,  though  I  am  "  on  the  shady  side  of  life "  in  years,  and 
know  full  well  that  I  cannot  do  this  so  vigorously,  perhaps,  as  I  once  could. 
But  I  am  an  old  man  now !  It  may  be,  upon  examining  the  extracts  I 
have  presented  upon  pages  158  to  161,  of  this  volume,  that  you  will  change 
your  conclusions.  It  may  be  not!  It  is  idle  for  you  to  assume,  as  you  do  in 
your  letter  to  me  in  May,  1874,  that  you  "did  the  best  you  could  with  the 
evidence  upon  this  subject  that  was  accessible  to  you,"  or  that  "  you  relied 
upon  the  statements  of  Mr.  Virgil  Cornish,  publicly  made."  jpWor  to  1870, 
upon  which  your  atrocious  theory  is  based  ;  inasmuch  as,  up  to  the  date  of 
Cornish's  personal  letter  to  you,  in  1871,  you  very  well  know  that  he  had 
never  once  mentioned  my  name,  or  my  fowls,  in  his  letters  published.  The 
malicious  animus  of  your  rodomontade  against  me,  thrusts  itself  out  offen- 
sively in  every  page  of  your  two  books  previously  written ;  when,  up  to  that 


BURNT! AM   VS.    WRIGHT.  167 

period,  you  cannot  find  the  slightest  ground  in  Cornish' 's  "  evidence/'  to  im- 
plicate me,  in  any  way  whatever  in  this  miserable  business,  of  which  you  have 
at  last  gratuitously  involved  me,  or  attempted  to  entangle  me,  so  unrighteously. 
In  all  candor  let  me  say,  in  the  language  of  another,  that  "  misrepresenta- 
tions unwittingly  made  may  possibly  be  construed  as  simple  manslaughter  ; 
but  deliberate  falsehood,  persisted  in,  with  the  light  of  truth  before  us,  can 
only  be  accounted  downright  murder,  with  malice  aforethought."  And  if 
this  axiom  be  inapplicable  to  your  case,  I  am  not  a  judge  of  the  course  you 
have  so  causelessly  pursued  towards  me,  in  the  "  Brahma  Fowl,  a  mono- 
graph" enlarged  upon  and  extended,  insufferably,  in  the  otherwise  presenta- 
ble pages  of  your  last  quarto,  the  "Illustrated  Book  of  Poultry. v  Why  pile 
up  the  agony,  as  you  have  done,  in  this  later  volume  ?  Was  your  splenetic 
disposition  unsatiated  with  the  abuse  you  had  voluntarily  heaped  upon  my 
unoffending  head  in  that  first  work  ?  Could  you  not  be  content  with  putting 
forth  edition  after  edition  of  that  scurrilous  volume,  but  you  must  fill  your 
later  ponderous  tome  with  the  venomous  shafts  of  your  spleen  directed  at 
poor  me  —  in  page  after  page  of  slanderous  speculation  and  bosh,  about 
"  Burnham  this,"  and  "  Burnham  that  ?  " 

In  view  of  all  the  unjust  and  plainly  malicious  vituperation  and  slander 
thus  concocted  by  you,  in  your  two  recent  books,  backed  by  the  far-fetched 
"testimony"  furnished  by  your  officious  friend  Weld  (whom  I  never  before 
heard  of),  I  am  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  you  have  heaped  up  this  cal- 
umny and  abuse  most  causelessly  and  recklessly.  Without  a  show  of  foun- 
dation for  your  ill-conceived  and  basely  considered  assault,  you  have  thus 
wantonly  vilified  a  man,  who  has  for  thirty  years  striven  to  the  best  of  his 
power,  assiduously  and  steadily  to  improve  and  advance  the  interests  of  the 
poultry  fraternity  ;  and  who  has  succeeded  —  as  you  cannot  deny  —  in  ac- 
complishing some  small  share  of  good  in  this  direction,  first  and  last. 

You  are  welcome  to  all  the  "  pleasure  and  benefit  "  this  "  labor  of  love"(?) 
on  your  part  "  has  yielded  3^011."  But  if,  in  your  retired  hours,  you  reflect 
upon  the  evil  calumnies  you  have  put  forth  thus  inconsiderately,  embodying 
the  groundless  assaults  you  have  made  upon  me,  therein,  so  totally  uncalled-for 
and  so  unreasonably  indited,  under  any  view  of  the  facts  in  the  case  —  I 
doubt  not  the  "still  small  voice"  that  has  its  home  in  the  breast  of  every 
honest  man  whom  God  has  furnished  with  ordinary  powers  of  reason,  will 
suggest  to  you  that  you  have,  in  this  instance,  committed  a   grievous  wrong 


168  THE  CHINA  FOWL. 

towards  an  inoffending  fellow-man,  that  you  will  not  live  long  enough  to  set 
aright.  ISTo  one  ought  to  know  better  than  yourself  that  an  uttered  falsity 
is  like  the  cut  of  a  sabre,  —  the  wound  may  heal,  but  the  scar  remains ! 

Turn  you,  now,  Lewis  Wright,  to  the  preface  of  your  "  Brahma  Fowl," 
and  read  these  lines,  penned  by  you  in  the  early  editions  of  that  work  — 
which,  I  observe,  you  (or  your  publishers)  have  expunged  from  the  preface  of 
your  third  edition  ! 

"  We  do  assert  that  even  the  poultry-fancy  may  be  carried  on  in  the 
reverent  spirit  of  earnest  work,  and  that  we  know  some  who  are  really  seek- 
ing in  this  way,  not  alone  to  amuse  their  leisure,  but  in  the  fear  of  God  to 
benefit  the  community,  of  which  they  form  a  part.  .  .  .  We  have  thought  it 
worth  while  to  give  time,  and  thought,  and  labor,  even  to  a  book  about 
i  nothing  but  Hmhmas?  "  (It  certainly  would  have  been  nearer  the  truth, 
bad  you  here  stated  '  a  book  about  nothing  but  Burnham  ! 5)  "  We  can  truly 
say  it  has  been  a  labor  of  love  ( /  / )  and  it  has  yielded  to  ourselves  both 
pleasure  and  benefit  in  many,  many  ways." 

These  are  commendable  sentiments  —  though,  under  all  the  circumstances, 
to  my  mental  olfactories,  in  your  case,  they  "  smell  strongly  of  the  shop." 
Why  are  these  sentences  left  out  of  your  latest  London  edition,  which  I 
received  but  a  few  weeks  ago  ?  Those  words  were  about  the  best  in  your 
book  !  Eestore  them,  in  your  next  edition  —  and  leave  out  the  heaped-up 
abuse  of  "Burnham,"  that  disgraces  so  many  other  pages  of  that  volume. 

"The  worm  you  tread  on  will  turn  to  bite,"  in  his  poor  way.  I  am  not  a 
worm,  but  I  have  been  forced  by  your  malignant  assaults  upon  me,  into  this 
ungracious  and  unjust  quarrel;  and  I  leave  the  public  to  judge  if  I  am  the 
aggressor  in  this  contest. 

At  all  events,  in  closing  these  pages  I  feel  assured  in  my  own  mind  that 
those  who  will  take  the  trouble  to  examine  the  overwhelming  evidence  I 
have  in  this  volume  presented,  touching  your  baseless  theory  an,d  discourteous 
treatment  of  me,  in  your  two  recent  elaborate  poultry  books,  will  decide  justly 
between  us;  and  I  do  not  fear  the  judgment  that  will  now' be  accorded  by 
the  intelligent,  unbiassed  reader,  upon  the  question,  Is  Geo.  P.  Burnham  right 
in  this  controversy,  or  is  Lewis  Wright  clearly  and  reprehensibly  wrong  ? 

THE    END. 


•: 


FANCIER'S  JOURNAL  AND  POULTRY  EXCH 

V.V;-,;,  ;.';  J  EIAj   p£5X 

sJTo&epfc  >1,  Wa^e,  Editor  and  Proprietor* 


THE  POULTRY  WORLD, 

EAHTFOBD,  Cess.. 

K.  B   Standard,  Editor. 

id  MS 


*ET  STOCK,  PfCEON,  AND  POULTRY  BUL! 

Alston  B.  I~.stes,  3Edircr;  P.O.  Be?  3.16, 

'rated 


CULTIVATOR  AND  COUNTRY  GENTLEI 

ALBANY.  XT. 
I..  fit.  Tucker  and  Cilber*  M.  Tucker,  Editors. 

A  If  c  the  ne?C?  cf  Fanner*.  Poultry  Fanciers,  Stock  Rt 

someiy  printed,    The  leading  «r«**/^  journaf  of  its  kind  in  Amel 
v  mail. 


TURF,  FIELD,  AND  FARM, 

S7  PARE  ROW,  New  York. 
S.  X>.  Brace,  Hamilton  Busbey,  1L.  €-  Bruce,  Editoi 

The  r.cm it :ed  leading  Sportsmen's,  .Fanciers',  Yachters',  Chess  Players',  Agricuid 
tetftrs.'  chronicle,    A  large  20  page  folio,  nicely  printed,  wk<kly<  at  $6.00  per  annud 

THE   POULTRY  REVIEW. 

PIGEON  AND  RABBIT  STANDARD. 
Edited  by  James  Long* 

LONDON,  Esq. 

The  English  organ  of  the  combined  fanciers,  published  weekly,  tllaftrated  by  the  fi 
Hakrison  Wxib,  J,  W.  Ludlow,  and  G.  E.  Barnes     It  contains  full  awards  and 
shows,  nbfces  on  American  Poultry  doing*,  etc     Price  post  free  tc  America,  #4.10  a 
half  year.    One  of  the  olde*t  poultry  journals  m  England. 


THE  POULTRY  RECORD, 

Air  ILLUSTRATED  MONTXILl  MAGAZINE. 
Edited  by  €*  W*  Heaton, 

FARHmGTON,  lm, 
One  Dollar  per  year.    Contains  each  month  fine  iBustmttons  of  tb«  popular  fm<| 
plans  of  houses,  yards,  and  appliances,  with  contribution*  relating  t©  all  branch* 
raising.    An  elegantly  printed  paper. 

NORTHWESTERN  POULTRY  JOURNAl 

T.  T.  Bacheller,  Editor. 

A  large,  new,  three-column  monthly,  splendidly  illustrated,  published  In  Minn« 
The  only  Poultry  paper  west  of  Illinois;  the  largest  West  of  Connecticut;  the  orga 
for  the  great  Northwest.    Price,  $1.00  per  year. 

jj^rp0yLTRY  ARGUS, 

Edited  by  l>r.  C  R.  Kenegy, 
POLO,  hju 

One  <sf  the  best  Illustrated  Monthlies  published  in  the  Great  West;  fully  up  to  th< 
•.tens  pertaining  to  the  poultry  interests  of  Breeders  and  Fanciers.    {Subscription, J 


